Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside).

>> I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, Scott.>>

I have no problem with that.

>> I don't think Olive is trying to manipulate his results.>>

Manipulate is a loaded word. I beleive he is sincere and wants the best results he can get. But it looks to me like he has an afinity for definitive results.


>> He may inadvertently BE manipulating his results. To some degree, everyone does. The objective of good methodology is to minimize it.>>

That is what I suspect he is doing via oversimplification. I suspect he is drawn towards results that are less ambiguous. He claims that the results form testing in mono is both more sensitive and tracks with stereo tests. he says there is more "noise" with testing in stereo. For me there in lies the rub and I have just asked Sean about my concerns here on the HA thread. We will see how he responds. WTF is "noise" in blind perceptual preference tests? I *suspect* that the results are simply less conclusive in stereo than in mono. Is that "noise" or is that simply a more complex yet more accurate "signal?" In stereo there is more independent qualities to judge hence more opertunites for divergence in preferences. Is that noise? IMO trying to eliminate such "noise" is an act of oversimplification and a sublime dismisal of diversity in opinions. I suspect he wants simple and decisive answers for complex questions that ultimately will wrought more ambiguous answers. I think in effect this amounts to an aversion to diversity in taste.

>>I think two things have contributed to his testing in mono:

1) He, or someone at Harman, has invented an effective way to blind A/B speakers (the speaker mover); INDIVIDUAL speakers. He tests what he has the tools to test.

2) Lack of personal belief in the importance of imaging.>>


I think you give him less credit than I do here. I don't think he is dissing imaging. he has given his reasons. Mono tests are more "sensitive." and they track stereo tests. I question whether or not they are really more sensitive just because they wrought more consolidated results. i think there is an underlying assumption there that preferences will consolidate as the data gets "better." It seems to me he is judging the lesser consolidation in the stereo tests as a lack of sensitivity when I suspect it is simply indicitive of diversity in taste since there are more elements to subjectively wiegh against each other. I don't think more "complex" results means less sensitivity. I have a hard time wrapping my head around any rationale that would lead one to consider results of listening tests that don't represent actual in the field usage as anything but less acurate than results of listening tests that better represent actual consumer usage i.e. mono tests instead of stereo.




>> Majority rules? Of course.>>

I agree and said as much. i do get the business part of it.


>> We're talking about research that will ultimately be used to develop and market products. The ultimate goal is to please more listeners and capture greater market share. But as long as his quest for the preferences of the majority keep leading him to greater accuracy, his "majority rules" will even serve audiophiles who couldn't care less about the preferences of the majority.>>


"Greater accuracy?" Accuracy to what reference?


>> Or at least they'll serve this one. So far I almost always find the more accurate to be the more musical.>>


How do *you* measure "more accurate?" And how do *you* measure "more musical?" the answer to these questions really sets aprameters of any further discussion and the answers will not be the same for all audiophiles. I think the quest for "accuracy" is a bit of an open can of worms. Accuracy has no meaning without a reference and in audio the choice of reference is..well, let's say an interesting one.


>> But I am also one of Sean's "image obsessed," listeners, so I'll have to keep an ear out for that. Where I really disagree with him is in the notion that there is something wrong with the center image of a stereo pair. If there is, there is something wrong with the system.>>


I agree with you there.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]