Re: Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing"

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Acoustic polarity, again - KlausR. 02:36:41 05/06/07 (113)

Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing" - KlausR. 07:12:49 05/15/07 (12)

Re: Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing" - john curl 11:05:29 05/16/07 (9)

Re: We had not refined the terminology yet. - KlausR. 23:18:46 05/16/07 (7)

Re: We had not refined the terminology yet. - john curl 21:23:08 05/17/07 (6)

Had a bad day, John? - KlausR. 23:34:05 05/17/07 (5)

Re: Had a bad day, John? - john curl 13:38:50 05/18/07 (4)

Re: Had a bad day, John? - john curl 15:44:03 05/20/07 (0)

Now it's throwing mud, you're improving by the day,John! - KlausR. 23:03:11 05/18/07 (2)

Re: Now it's throwing mud, you're improving by the day,John! - john curl 23:11:09 05/18/07 (1)

Now it's insults, it's getting better by the minute! - KlausR. 00:17:59 05/19/07 (0)

Re: Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing" - john curl 11:12:55 05/16/07 (0)

John's post is still there but for some unknown reasons I did not find it any more (nt) - KlausR. 09:03:52 05/15/07 (0)

Try listening. nt - markrohr 08:24:20 05/15/07 (0)

Its not a battery, not that simple. - tomservo 07:40:38 05/07/07 (0)

some crossovers invert polarity - Kloss 06:46:27 05/07/07 (1)

Good man! nt - clarkjohnsen 07:59:45 05/07/07 (0)

This suggests that speaker designers either don't think polarity is important or don't care. - Norm 06:31:46 05/07/07 (2)

Re: This suggests that speaker designers either don't think polarity is important or don't care. - unclestu52 18:16:43 05/12/07 (0)

Re: your findings should be made public - KlausR. 07:19:56 05/07/07 (0)

That's right, why bother? - markrohr 08:29:05 05/06/07 (41)

Re : It might only make half your record collection sound better, for free - KlausR. 10:48:26 05/06/07 (40)

"80% of the speakers aren't, so why bother?" - markrohr 03:47:52 05/07/07 (27)

Because... - KlausR. 04:29:23 05/07/07 (26)

Is this - markrohr 03:15:30 05/09/07 (25)

It took you a while but... - KlausR. 05:01:51 05/09/07 (24)

Re: It took you a while but... - Doc Gaw 10:02:10 05/20/07 (0)

"So if polarity inversion is audible with sub-peforming speakers only ..." - Dave Pogue 06:29:40 05/11/07 (5)

Whoever cannot recognize absolute polarity, shall be deemed superfluous - KlausR. 23:10:42 05/11/07 (3)

I love that! - Dave Pogue 04:49:20 05/12/07 (2)

Re: I love that! - KlausR. 05:41:22 05/12/07 (1)

Tell you what. - Dave Pogue 07:21:12 05/12/07 (0)

Even more inaudible . . . - markrohr 14:43:18 05/11/07 (0)

Re: It took you a while but... - unclestu52 11:59:26 05/09/07 (10)

"In the case of Classical music, polarities become a mixed bag with the advent of heavy multimiking" . . . no. - markrohr 11:04:42 05/10/07 (3)

Re: "In the case of Classical music, polarities become a mixed bag with the advent of heavy multimiking" . . . no. - unclestu52 01:19:19 05/12/07 (2)

Re: "In the case of Classical music, polarities become a mixed bag with the advent of heavy multimiking" . . . no. - markrohr 04:00:39 05/14/07 (0)

Timing errors - KlausR. 02:44:03 05/12/07 (0)

Re: The answer is not to accept the status quo - KlausR. 00:14:56 05/10/07 (5)

"When Dr. Heyser was president of AES, that would have been the very moment for Clark." ROTFLOL! - clarkjohnsen 09:28:29 05/11/07 (4)

Actually, I didn't do a search on that one, but... - KlausR. 00:02:24 05/12/07 (3)

Nor have you much searched the Wood effect -- that's the whole problem. - clarkjohnsen 10:10:02 05/12/07 (2)

Three questions, well, actually four - KlausR. 21:43:54 05/12/07 (1)

"still not enough solid evidence that polarity inversion is audible on properly designed speakers" - markrohr 11:14:28 05/09/07 (2)

Re: Why should anyone pay attention to you? - KlausR. 00:02:07 05/10/07 (1)

"asymmetric clicks" - markrohr 11:09:22 05/10/07 (0)

"There's still not enough solid evidence that polarity inversion is audible on properly designed speakers." Where's... - clarkjohnsen 09:00:04 05/09/07 (2)

C'mon, Clark, you know what I mean! nt - KlausR. 09:29:17 05/09/07 (1)

Yes, I know: It's all up to you, what's "solid". Or "convincing". Some scientist! nt - clarkjohnsen 09:41:13 05/09/07 (0)

Indeed, Why bother paying for low - unclestu52 13:45:09 05/06/07 (0)

A good reason perhaps to move up to better speakers? Ones without high amounts of phase distortion? nt - clarkjohnsen 13:25:01 05/06/07 (10)

Re: A good reason perhaps to move up to better speakers? Ones without high amounts of phase distortion? nt - KlausR. 02:10:28 05/07/07 (8)

Re: A good reason perhaps to move up to better speakers? Ones without high amounts of phase distortion? nt - tomservo 07:53:14 05/08/07 (1)

It's Klein+Hummel O500C - KlausR. 09:15:19 05/08/07 (0)

Re: A good reason perhaps to move up to better speakers? Ones without high amounts of phase distortion? nt - tomservo 17:55:24 05/07/07 (2)

That might explain his, ah, lack... nt - clarkjohnsen 09:13:47 05/08/07 (0)

DSP it is indeed. - KlausR. 23:50:26 05/07/07 (0)

So tell us then, why you can't hear polarity? nt - clarkjohnsen 07:56:47 05/07/07 (2)

I guess it's my gear, it's probably too good (nt) - KlausR. 00:02:01 05/08/07 (1)

You're funny... for a European... nt - clarkjohnsen 09:12:51 05/08/07 (0)

Turning over a new leaf, Clark? - unclestu52 15:17:58 05/06/07 (0)

Re: Acoustic polarity, again - tomservo 06:42:48 05/06/07 (11)

"VERY few multi-way speakers do it at all." Lucky us, then! Who have... - clarkjohnsen 13:47:44 05/06/07 (9)

Re: "VERY few multi-way speakers do it at all." Lucky us, then! Who have... - tomservo 14:45:01 05/06/07 (8)

Nice story. Mine goes like this: - clarkjohnsen 07:51:59 05/07/07 (7)

Re: Nice story. Mine goes like this: - tomservo 10:46:24 05/07/07 (6)

On the CD, compared to what there was to record with before ones and zeroâ€™s... - clarkjohnsen 13:48:19 05/07/07 (5)

Re: On the CD, compared to what there was to record with before ones and zeroâ€™s... - tomservo 14:28:48 05/07/07 (4)

Hmmm... but in the early days even great old analog tapes transferred to CD sounded bad. Moreover... - clarkjohnsen 08:52:55 05/08/07 (2)

Re: Hmmm... but in the early days even great old analog tapes transferred to CD sounded bad. Moreover... - tomservo 10:03:08 05/08/07 (1)

Also who ever keeps spouting Nyquist... needs to be shown the light." Or, the door... - clarkjohnsen 10:14:52 05/08/07 (0)

Better be careful ! - E-Stat 16:43:05 05/07/07 (0)

Can't access your forum - KlausR. 07:49:13 05/06/07 (0)

Lotsa reasons - Dave Pogue 04:53:43 05/06/07 (39)

Re: Lotsa reasons - KlausR. 07:33:20 05/06/07 (38)

"There's not enough convincing evidence." Hmm... What's the scientific criterion for "convincing"? Where... - clarkjohnsen 13:33:52 05/06/07 (35)

Re: However, all the evidence you may need is in the very book described in your referenced article - KlausR. 07:08:36 05/07/07 (34)

Mr. Blackburn is sorely mistaken on this topic, and I have published a rebuttal. BUT: - clarkjohnsen 07:55:44 05/07/07 (33)

Re: You avoided answering my question - KlausR. 09:03:26 05/07/07 (32)

Contrary to the contempt and condescension shown by tlyyra below... - clarkjohnsen 13:57:09 05/07/07 (31)

And this you call a rebuttal? - KlausR. 00:04:55 05/08/07 (1)

"Your 'evidence' is not convincing." Back, as always, to that. I.e.... - clarkjohnsen 09:11:50 05/08/07 (1)

From the way you present your POV - Dave Pogue 07:44:23 05/06/07 (1)

"Not enough convincing evidence . . ." - markrohr 08:27:03 05/06/07 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: Reply to John Curl's suggestion to read Schroeder's "Models of hearing" - john curl 11:12:55 05/16/07 (0)

Post a Message!