--- Dan Frakes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> Two speakers that are measured by equipment to have the exact same
> specifications can sound remarkably different to human ears, even
> in
> controlled, double-blind testing.
I'd be astonished if you could ever find two speakers (even a
supposedly 'matched' stereo pair with adjacent serial numbers) that
measure identically. The point is that it's almost *always* possible
to measure differences - it's establishing at what point those
differences become immaterial from an audibility point-of-view that's
the tricky bit.
Now, if a listener really does observe differences between components
which measure so alike as to be predictably (from all we know about
hearing thresholds) identical *to the human ear*, we should look for
alternative explanations. Perhaps we haven't measured the right
thing. Perhaps this observation has highlighted an electrical
phenomenon not previously considered important in audio reproduction.
Or (and this is usually the most likely explanation), the listener's
observations are not entirely based up acoustic stimulus (i.e. it's a
sighted observation, the listener knows the identity of the unit
under test, the listener has been told that they're now listening to
something different, etc).
Double-blind tests aren't generally considered necessary for
speakers, btw - the difference between different models are usually
pretty gross. See also vinyl sources...
> That's why audio magazines don't
> just
> publish measurements, and why we don't buy stereos by spec sheets.
Absolutely - we *audition* them. Of course this typically involves
straying away from the dictionary definition of that term and using
our *eyes* as well as ears, so we may perceive differences where none
(in the audible realm) exist. Those audio magazines do indeed
include plenty more copy than just spec sheets - but how useful is
any of their prose? How many of those conduct *proper* critical
listening tests, free from non-aural bias? How many just seek to
obfuscate and confuse with flowery subjective assessment (often
riddled with a healthy dose of audiophile mythology), free from
meaningful references?
The British mag Hi-Fi Choice were in the habit of conducting some
form of blind panel test for comparative reviews, but this practice
would appear to have been dropped recently (frustratingly - just as
they get their hands on some affordable DVD-A and SACD hardware!).
So, yes - it's certainly not just about specs. If only for the
reason that, contrary to what you say, specs show up differences
between *everything*, while our ears are not nearly so sensitive (but
are prone to other influences, unless we take steps to minimise their
effect). Believe your ears - but your ears *alone*.
Mike.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
