ABS: What Is The Trouble With Measurements.

 

Test your speakers / room.... in particular track 15 with the 2 singers in your  ear and the orchestra behind the speakers...

Acoustic experience dont come "magically" from a high price piece of gear... By the mere virtue of his design alone...

Then correlating electrical measures of design with describing words is arbitrary to a great extent...

 

But controlling time and timing, intensity frequencies levels, and direction and distance of apparent sound source in their ratio to listener envelopment factor is possible and can be described by words in our own experience...

For example in some opera good recording of Kurt Weill, the sound come almost behind me and near each one of my ears from two different singers with the orchestra imaging behind the speakers at the same time...

By the way a 2 stereo system is always composed of 4 speakers, two virtual one and two actual one, by virtue of the differential distance between each ear and your head diameter...

Why is this Kurt Weill recording sound like that ?

Because my room acoustic and psycho acoustic control made me able to sit on the stage with the singers turning their head and walking and singing with their voices perceived from different angles accordingly to their movement...All that with an intimacy experience that crash my 8 headphones,,,

For sure the reason first is the acoustic well encoded trade-off choices of the recording engineer, a genius, and the way my room is able to translate it acoustically and psych-acoustically for my 2 ears/brain interpretation....

For example i use a foldable screen like an acoustic lens to better control the ratio direct and reflected waves, and a hundred tuned Helmholtz resonators and also duffusers at critical locations to control intensity frequencies response of the speakers/room for my specific ears...

 

Is it perfect?

No...( for example more resolving system exist a very high price, but i dont want them at all cost even if i could afford them... my system is enough resolving and non fatiguing at all )

Is it better than anything i ever heard live?

Yes...( Even if my live system experience is limited, i am not a pro audio reviewer, my system beat all those i ever heard for me)

 

The only important factor to control save the embeddings one, are the S.Q. /price ratio factor...

But to control this ratio means you must be able to OPTIMIZE what you already own and know how to embed it rightfully...You must learn how to know the potential of what you already have...

Anything else is ignorance and sound obsession....

Upgrading your brain/ear acoustic experience matter much than upgrading the gear most of the times...

 

For sure i own a dedicated room... It is impossible to do that in a living room...

For sure my room is not esthetical, it is impossible to do an esthetical job with junk material and home made device and my uncrafty hands... My talent is undertanding books and teaching reading analysis not creating work of art... 😁😊

For sure the same thing can be made in an acoustically designed room with all resonators hidden and some esthetically designed...

But my price cost is peanuts, and acoustician designing such a tuned room will cost a fortune, easily near 100,000 bucks because of the time needed andnot only the materials needed ....

One thing is sure it is way more fun to tune a system in a consuming time ongoing set of listening experiments then the brief pleasure to plug a new gear in the wall at high price...😁😊

 

My way forward has been mainly by listening. Also considering good measurements when available.

 

There is standard  design engineering measures of the gear in the absolute or in the ideal,  out of any embeddings working specific dimensions...

The article refer to the way this set of electrical measures of a piece of gear design with measuring tools in a neutral environment to isolate each factors means something or not, in words, related to a specific acoustic context...The article give an interesting exemple about the way some contextual information  help to interpret some restricted  electrical measures ....

 

The general  necessary context is what i called the 3 (4 like the 3 musketerers) working embedding dimensions...

Electrical noise floor control, mechanical vibration control and the two most important last one : acoustic and the psycho-acoustic controls which are necessary in small room and very transformative...

The acoustic set of measures is not ONLY a fixed set of measures to begin with like the design piece of gear final measures, because your small room must be tuned by your ears for your ears, it is not a big hall, this set of ongoing acoustic measures will ve a tuning process in time...And in this tuning acoustic process you learn doing it how to tune your own ear/brain to the speaker/room and for a specific set of gear...

In acoustic for example the ratio listener envelopment/ apparent source width, or LEV/ASW, cannot be improved without installing acoustic devices to improve the timing delays between reflections coming from front and behind and lateral one... To do this without affecting negatively other acoustic parameters like localization and timbre ask for a measuring listening experiment ongoing process in many phases...

Contrary to the opinion of many, the sound of the recording trade-off set of choices by a recording engineer is not so much reproduced but translated from these recording acoustic choices from the engineer, in the acoustic specific language of your room via measuring tuning process and for each of your ear...

Then here measures and acoustic concepts(words) must be correlated..

A good speakers/room control will not make a bad dac or bad amplifier good one for sure, but will help to optimize their working by compensation of the room response to the speakers and to the system behind it...

There is also a set of psycho-acoustic possible controls in small room to improve the intimacy of the experience and make any small room better than most headphones...

Buy relatively good gear first, after that create your own set of listening experiments , correlating measures of room/speakers properties measured by listening experiment and with basic device ( spl device etc) you will be able to describe in words and simple acoustic concept this ongoing transformative process under your own control...

 

 

 

 

The author says that the "trouble" with measurements is that their meaning is difficult to convey to their readership.  That's all.  So, they prefer adjectives (words that describe).

Measurements are one way of communicating knowledge. Words are another. Both have their virtues and limitations. So, philosophically, TAS.. doesn’t really have a preference for one over the other....We choose to focus on words because our experience is that they are one level closer to how readers think about sound than measurements are. 

One must end such a profound philosophical and patronising statement about their readers with a preposition.

@russ69 Good catch! Actually, I'm a fan of watching the odometer while driving. I'll be darned if I'm going to miss it turning from 99,999 to 100,000!

Same with my driving speed. Don't consult the odometer...ever!

Me either, I use the speedometer. Just like audio, you have to have the right measurement/equipment for what you are trying to do. 

 

Sugar in coffee!!!😉Gaah!Some measurements are useful to me and have helped me avoid mismatches when considering an upgrade. But most of us know or have learned from past mistakes that putting together components simply because they measure well on paper doesn't work out well.

@hilde45 - Of course! I like having fun and joking around....  

And as it happens, I am a diabetic (type 2) - I don't bother with weighing out carbs in food; I can't live like that - I've been at this for over 20 years and I know what makes my blood sugar go up and avoid certain things, and I've got a FreeStyle sensor system that allows me to take a blood sugar measurement any time I want with a sensor attached instead of finger-sticks, so I always know where I'm at and what adjustments, if any, to make! 

Now THOSE measurements I DO care about! 😄

@larsman Thanks for letting me joke around a bit.

In seriousness, measurements are nothing by themselves -- context and purpose are necessary. Some don’t care how much sugar is in their coffee -- a lot or a little. "Lot" and "little" are crude measurements, and they’re fine for most people. But if one is diabetic, then weighing out foods is critical, because the context and stakes are different.

Some who say "measurements don’t matter" in audio are saying they can’t matter. Others are saying they simply prefer not to know because they want things to stay informal and fun. They want to keep the hobby a-scientific -- and that’s cool. That’s how I am with sugar in my coffee.

@hilde45 - Common sense is good! And I've got enough common sense to get regularly checked out medically. My medical conditions have nothing at all to do with my audio system, but there ya go! 

@larsman Good point, but I don't think that I need measurements for those things -- my common sense is good enough for them and also for audio. Nothing is at stake because common sense is all I need!

@hilde45 - that's an excellent point, except that nothing in my audio chain can kill me or anybody else if left unchecked. 

I go 100% by listening; I couldn't tell you the measurements of much of anything in my listening chain. That stuff has just never interested me. 

@larsman I feel the same way about my cholesterol. If I feel good, the numbers don’t matter at all. (Same with my driving speed. Don't consult the odometer...ever! I know what seems right in the circumstances!)

I go 100% by listening; I couldn't tell you the measurements of much of anything in my listening chain. That stuff has just never interested me. 

If they're useful to many people, and I know they are, great, but that does not mean they need be useful to everybody.

The single most significant variable in all of audiophilia is the speaker/room. It is an extremely complicated variable and the only way to understand it is to measure it. The performance variability in electronics is miniscule in comparison. 

The next question is what are you going to do with speaker/room measurements. You have to have continuously variable control of amplitude and delay along with an understanding of acoustics and how to deal with unwanted additions by the room.  

Power to you if you think you can do this by ear. The ear is best at appreciating the results and making adjustments to suite taste. 

With speakers need to measure in room response, all rooms different. Do this at home, you'll find best placement for speakers and seating position. Measurements from some review or spec page only tell you so much.

However, readers and reviewers alike cannot really escape the issue of epistemology that confronts all of us as humans and as audiophiles. In plain english, we all face the issue of how we gather and transmit knowledge of the sound of audio equipment.

Hmm NO sir, THAT is YOUR, responsibility as an audiophile "journalist" As a Carpenter/Gen Contr., I built many houses. I designed and built my own house. I used measurements all day long over the construction period. After it was built, I put away the measuring tools and just enjoyed the house and lived in it. Yes, there are times I still use measurements in the house,such as hanging a shelf. The same can be said of the audio consumer who needs to find the proper sensitivity speaker for their low powered amp. But it ends there because every ear is different as is every room and every amp. Too many variables exist for the consumer and the builder alike. So the builders measurements are meant to build the best piece to perform under ideal conditions. This is why the piece of equipment sounds great in the showroom (which is ideal) but different at YOUR house.

The worst piece of equipment I ever bought sounded good in the showroom, had great specs and reviews but sounded like sh** with my original large advents (Luxman) I don’t usually talk bad about Luxman because I know that every persons hearing and preference, system and rooms are different. Many here like Lux for a reason...It worked for them. But I’m sure I am not alone in not caring for the Lux sound....at least their 80’s sound. I could carry on for much longer about this but the main point is that we are humans with all our differences because each of us are unique with unique likes and dislikes. We are NOT machines which are all stamped out from the same exact mold. For some reason, this seems to have been lost on the modern mindset. but that is another conversation.

Thank you for posting this. I'm very interested in the epistemology of listening and it is news to me that a well known publication is daring to put "philosophical" as the header of a column.

The LRS measures badly

Because the measurement technique they use isn't able to measure dipoles.

Subjective assessment is the highest form of discrimination and is highly dependent on the intrinsic capacity for acute and gifted discernment of the observer.

All speakers are imperfect and deserve to be measured. Subjective listening alone is not enough! In fact, measuring identifies the problem areas and then DSP can  be used to correct frequency response flaws, resulting in much improved sound.

The LRS measures badly - and sounds bad!  Contrary to what the Magnepan fanboys claim. Can't afford to speak the truth and offend an advertiser! Check out the test and listening results on ASR.