Home » Audio » Speaker » measurements II
measurements II [message #17533] Sat, 05 February 2005 10:11 Go to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
You know whats funny, I see some exceptionally good empirical science expressed here, and one unifying theme seems to be to shun any hint of subjective analysis; and rightfully so.
However the concept of no fundamental archetype for understanding subjective impressions has always puzzled me and this is why.
As a muscician for many years I will state that when I express a musical concept to another muscician they appear to understand exactly what I mean, and the subsequent discussion also appears to indicate that in fact, they do. Whole musical desicions regarding recording/orchestral arranging/hall construction/ensemble playing; are made based upon these subjective conclusions that appear to be universally understood.
How can that be?

Re: measurements II [message #17534 is a reply to message #17533] Sat, 05 February 2005 14:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Damir is currently offline  Damir
Messages: 1005
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (2nd Degree)
Hey, I can`t say I`m an musician, say an amateur with >20 years of practice (bass & guitar). I noticed one (between many) interesting thing in "jamming" with someone that sometimes happened - you don`t need to express yourself/your song/musical concept by words, another person "in the same film" intuitively know everything...

Re: measurements II [message #17536 is a reply to message #17533] Sat, 05 February 2005 17:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18787
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

I think artists and musicians are more comfortable talking subjectively with one another than engineers are. Engineers need specificity in order to quantify themselves, but artists need to express emotions more. I think both speak in abstractions, but engineers put more emphasis on physical processes and artists place more emphasis on the effects the physical processes have on the people observing them.


Re: measurements II [message #17537 is a reply to message #17534] Sun, 06 February 2005 12:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
I hear that! The thing is the basic contention seems to be that there is no way to reconcile subjective criteria in music; but musicsions do it all the time and have no problem equating subjective terms to an exact meaning that is reproducible every time. Go into a studio and the mastering guy says give me a fatter sound on the bass drum. The drummer knows exactly what he means.
Tell a speaker guy that he needs more warmth in the mids and he refuses to accept the term "warmth" because it is subjective.
How come we can do it with music but not with stereo?

Re: measurements II [message #17538 is a reply to message #17536] Sun, 06 February 2005 13:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
hurdy_gurdyman is currently offline  hurdy_gurdyman
Messages: 416
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
I'm sure I could have a better and more meaningful conversation about how a given speaker sounds with a musician then an engineer.

Ya know, it may be just me, but I think I'd get greater joy listening to a speaker that a musician with no engineering background has "tweeked" to perfection then listening to a speaker that an engineer with no musical talant or experience has "tweeked" to his version of perfection.
Of course, someone who is both musician and engineer may come up with the best one of all.

Dave

Re: measurements II [message #17539 is a reply to message #17538] Sun, 06 February 2005 14:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18787
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

I agree. I think the best engineers of audio equipment are those that have had some music education and/or play an instrument. Most of the designers I know have backgrounds in music. Maybe that's natural, since the musical background cultivates an interest.


Re: measurements II [message #17543 is a reply to message #17533] Mon, 07 February 2005 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
HI everyone,
I don;t think any of us are disagreeing at all here, just saying the same thing in different ways, so i'll add my bit as well.

If we want the music system to offer high fidelity, then we mean it should reproduce the signal the way the recorded media sends. Notice that RECORDING the signal (in ther words encoding the live event) is also done by an engineer, who may equalize certain aspects of the performance to produce effects. Nevertheless, the goal of the sound system is to REPRODUCE this signal, not to reproduce the LIVE event.

A system at home that can reproduce the signal as it was recorded MUSt reproduce all frequencies flat, and offer neglibile distortion. Otherwise it is adding its OWN signature.

Now comes the subjectivity: some systems are not perfect (surprise!) and do add their own signature. In some cases that signature will enhance the recording (for example the second order distortion and non flat freq curve of a SET amp may make a female singer's voice a little more life like) so it appears more lifeliek to us, even more lifelike than perhaps the recording engineer intended. By the same token, the same amp may distort another recording to the point where it sounds pretty bad. (try playing ZZ top with a SET and single driver set up!)

Overall, if we are concerned about fidelity, then we need to be concerned about simple measurements. If we are concened about just how recrodings sound, then there are a lot of variables involved (liek what is the recording, what effects were used ,etc) and systems with poor fidelity will often enhance some recrodings and worsen others.

It's really all a matter of taste, finally. I am at present trying to pursue fidelity, but in my midrange (dfrom 60 hz to about 3500 HZ) i do have a set powering a high impedance driver! However, i am using a cheap sub for the below 60 hz a,d a cheap tweeter fr the treble, all powered by SS! The overall reposnse is far flatter than just using a SET with a full range driver, and to my ears more pleasing (much more pleasing actually). In other words I can now listen to both PAtricia BArber AND ZZ top on the same system ,and actually really enjoy both!
Not to mention complex orchestral arrangements!
-akhilesh


Re: measurements II [message #17544 is a reply to message #17543] Mon, 07 February 2005 17:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
Sounds like you have that system balanced out nice! I just expressed my confusion as to why subjective impressions work for muscisions and not for people who design audio. The signal purity argument is another whole debate.

Re: measurements II [message #17545 is a reply to message #17544] Tue, 08 February 2005 04:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
Thnaks John. I like its sound.
Here is an analogy that may explain the engineer's point of view:
WOuld a TV display help us enjoy a movie better over another? Probbaly, if it cinveyed the true original print better. In some cases, some displays may actually create an illusion of reality that surpasses the original print, maybe by making the trees greener, and the water bluer. Some viewers may like that, esp for movies that have landscapes. SUch a monitor would not be great from a fidelity perspective, but would work well for folk who watched landscape movies.
Finally: here is a thought provoking question:
In order to select a movie monitor, would we prefer the judgement of an actor or director over a tv monitor design engineer?
-akhilesh

Re: measurements II [message #17546 is a reply to message #17545] Tue, 08 February 2005 09:09 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
AK good to hear from you; I admitt you have me floored. I have no reply to the TV monitor question.

Previous Topic: Line Arrays in Rooms w/ Sloped Ceilings
Next Topic: Speaker Search
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Nov 22 19:29:39 CST 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest