Originally Posted by amirm
Originally Posted by kromkamp
Same question - how is someone supposed to do that? For example, I recall you saying you would not use Perf-Sorber because you prefer temporal diffusion. So, like, how is anyone supposed to know what that sounds like to be able to decide if that's what they want?
I am pretty sure he developed the preference for that not because he heard them, but because the technical explanation
of one ("temporal diffusion") literally sounded better to him! That is the basis of much of the advice people take from these forums. Unfortunately there is often little basis for such things when it comes to our actual perception. We don't have good intuition when it comes to the complex way our two ears and brain interpret these "mixed messages."
Just keep dishing out the nonsense based upon your ignorance of what was ACTUALLY done.
Here, let me quote Phillip Newell from Recording Studio Design - and note the emphasis on what the measurements and analysis was focused around! And yes, Puddie Rodgers was also a member of the consortium!:"In the late 1970s, Don and Carolyn Davis were keenly investigating many acoustic and psycho-acoustic phenomena with the then newly developed Time Energy Frequency/Time Delay Spectrometry (TEF/TDS) measurement systems. TDS measurements made at Wally Heider Studios, Los Angeles, USA, and at RCA and Capitol Records, in Hollywood, had given them a lot to think about, leading them to the concept of the ‘Reflection Free Zone’ and the ‘Live-End, Dead-End’ (LEDE) control rooms.
Concurrently, Carolyn (Puddie) Rodgers was presenting new ideas about how certain room reflection characteristics could confuse the ear by giving rise to response filtering which closely mimicked the pinnae (outer ear) transformations used by the brain to facilitate spacial localization.1 This work gave some very explicit explanations of the psycho acoustic relevance of the Energy/Time Curve (ETC) responses in the above-mentioned room measurements, and reinforced the concepts of the Davis’ LEDE principles. Don Davis and Chips Davis (no relation) then wrote their seminal paper on the ‘LEDE’ concept of control room design,2 and these rooms came into very widespread use in the subsequent years. The concepts were further developed by Jack Wrightson, Russell Berger, and other notable designers."
You will find that they led the charge with regards to psycho-acoustic testing with the advent of the time based tools which allowed for a much greater acuity in testing the psycho-acoustic effects of early arriving signals with respect to not only the Haas interval but to directivity as well as binaural effects, But then one would have to know and be aware of the working and collaborative relationships between such folks as Schroeder, D'Antonio, Berger, Davis, VMA Peutz, Peter Mapp, Don Keele, and a WHOLE RAFT of world class acoustical personages.
The scope and degree of collaboration as well as advancements in understanding has not come close to being duplicated since - with a preponderance of the relationships ongoing today..
The irony is that I personally have over 20 years of very detailed psycho-acoustic testing results relating EXACTLY measurements with psycho-acoustic subjective perception conducted by this group and others, much of which was not posted to the public domain but was distributed among the colloquium of the participants And Don was presented with Leo Beranek's PERSONAL private measurement and psycho acoustic evaluations of ALL of the major European concert halls - something no one else enjoyed based specifically on the scope of the psycho acoustic research for which Don and Carolyn served as the lightning rods.
And while I realize that you seem to think that the study of psycho-acoustics begins and ends with a Reader's digest compilation of various sources, the fact of the matter is that measurements were NEVER made simply for the sake of measurements, but they were in the spirit of Heyser, made in order to correlate physical behavior specifically with the subjective psycho-acoustic perception.
Its time to put this nonsensical mischaracterization of measurements solely for the sake of measurements spread by someone who it utterly clueless about the actual events into the trash where it belongs.
But its always interesting(sic) to hear one who is totally and utterly ignorant of both the technological history as well as the important social history of so many of the developments comment about that which they have absolutely no knowledge and even less awareness of what was discovered during this extremely fruitful period lasting over 25 years.
But hey, why should the facts get in the way of someone's personal agenda and attempt to market a product? especially one who has gleened the vast preponderance of his so called understanding, not for ANY actual involvement in testing and trial and error research, but simply from reading ONE book. Now that's what i would call an authority! LMAO!
And bandwidth limited ETCs. Yup, now THERE'S a new technology! Available from day one with TEF, the use of the technique has NEVER been ignored. But its nice to see a few discover it based upon their utter ignorance of the tool as well as their new found reference in Toole only literally 45 years after it was made available. But its nice to see a few wake up and become aware of what the users of the tools have been VERY aware of for longer than what most have even been involved in the industry - including Toole.
But yet, seeing as they have newly discovered such a radically NEW tool, they can now rightly claim to define its proper use and application. LOL!
One can't seem to put ANYTHING past these guys! And this was OLD news when Toole first presented a paper on the technique in 1987, when the response was a huge yawn, not because the concept or use was invalid, but because it was already 20 years old and OLD NEWS then.
So, Welcome to 1967!!!!!, or if you were one, like Russ Berger, who in 1977 actually assembled the $40,000 worth of GenRad and HP gear required to assemble a TEF under license, prior to Techron (and also B&K) actually assembling and manufacturing an all in one TEF in 1983.
Yup, its fascinating from the perspective of one who personally did not personally begin so early with the TEF but who has personally been intimate with the measure for 30 years to find a few who in their exuberance fancy themselves the discoverers of a new technology.
News flash, the internal combustion engine stands poised to threaten the dominance of the HORSE!
To paraphrase Don Davis: "The ancients keep stealing all of our inventions!" But ain't revisionist history and completely nonsensical assertions and conclusions fun!
But it is nice to see a few begin to become aware of technology, techniques and the implications thereof of that was well understood 30-45 years ago. And I might suggest withholding the over-exhuberant claims of new-found discovery for just a bit...