In Reply to: Re: You have hit upon THE biggest issue and misunderstanding in all of audio posted by KlausR. on April 1, 2007 at 04:03:33:
"Accuracy to the original event is one goal,"It is not a meaningful goal since stereo or even multi-channel recording and playback are not designed to do that. Again they are designed to create an "illusion" of an original event "from a single perspective." Huge difference.
" accuracy to the source (i.e. recording) is another."That is an absolutely meaningless reference since no "recording" as a "stand alone" entity has no intrinsic sound of it's own. You have to use playback equipment to get any sound out of a recording so you are using equipment as a reference. Another tail chase in the end.
"I for one am trying to achieve the second."How? What playback system do you use as your ultimate reference? And whay set that particular limit/signature on your reference?
"When a manufacturer claims that his speakers are the best sounding, this is difficult to verify."Actually it is meaningless because speakers do not exist in a vacuum. They need a room and a playback system and a recording to have any sound at all. All of those things impact the sound so the claim has no context without all those other elements.
" When a manufacturer claims that his speakers are the most accurate you just need to look at the measurements."Absolute balony. Speakers are transducers. They they turn one kind of energy, electrical into another, sound preasure. The idea of accuracy in speakers as a single component is absurd. At least with amps and preamps you can literally compare the input signal to the output signal and determine it's accuracy. How do you do that with speakers?Yet another tail chase.
" The fact that most speaker manufacturers don't provide measurements when asked speaks for itself."Indeed. But perhaps not in the way you think. I suspect they often realize what an absurd idea accuracy is in speakers as a component.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: You have hit upon THE biggest issue and misunderstanding in all of audio - Analog Scott 08:46:59 04/01/07 (22)
- So, your audio goal is exactly the same as Julian Hirsch's! - Pat D 12:52:45 04/01/07 (21)
- The article you linked is from 2001 - kerr 07:28:42 04/02/07 (1)
- Re: The article you linked is from 2001 - Pat D 10:43:42 04/02/07 (0)
- Re: So, your audio goal is exactly the same as Julian Hirsch's! - Analog Scott 13:14:57 04/01/07 (18)
- Analog Scott - thetubeguy1954 08:16:42 04/02/07 (14)
- Don't worry about me. - Analog Scott 18:11:54 04/02/07 (0)
- Tubey wants "fixed opinions!" - Pat D 12:05:07 04/02/07 (4)
- Pat D-Cake Wants To Parrot Others... - thetubeguy1954 14:17:41 04/02/07 (3)
- Omigod! Tubey thinks "accepted audio measurements" are manufacturers specs!! - Pat D 17:58:05 04/02/07 (2)
- Re: Omigod! Pat D-Cake Always Needs The Obvious To Be Explained To Him! - thetubeguy1954 12:11:24 04/03/07 (1)
- Tubey changes the ground rules! - Pat D 12:53:57 04/03/07 (0)
- What's a "Rationalist"? - kerr 09:02:19 04/02/07 (7)
- Re: What's a "Rationalist"? - thetubeguy1954 11:43:31 04/02/07 (6)
- Impossible. - Pat D 12:16:53 04/02/07 (5)
- Quite Possible & True! - thetubeguy1954 12:46:01 04/03/07 (4)
- Re: Quite Possible & True! - Pat D 20:47:53 04/03/07 (3)
- Re: Quite Possible & True! - thetubeguy1954 12:06:03 04/04/07 (2)
- You write a long post to try to avoid the obvious. - Pat D 21:59:29 04/04/07 (1)
- I Write A Long Post To Try To Explain Whats Obvious To Everyone Else To You!. - thetubeguy1954 08:42:15 04/05/07 (0)
- Re: So, your audio goal is exactly the same as Julian Hirsch's! - Pat D 14:25:01 04/01/07 (2)
- Re: So, your audio goal is exactly the same as Julian Hirsch's! - Analog Scott 14:41:41 04/01/07 (1)
- Re: So, your audio goal is exactly the same as Julian Hirsch's! - Pat D 19:20:49 04/01/07 (0)