Originally Posted by Mark Seaton
I sincerely hope we see more open technical debate, where people can understand a technical argument and difference of position is not a personal attack.
Most all of us product designers and others who are technically experienced will have differing takes on what qualities and factors we prioritize, along with different takes on what thresholds for distortions, nonlinearities, and capabilities are good enough or how far it might be worth pushing them.
One of the biggest problem in most areas where technical details and preference collide is reluctance to admit that we might not yet be sure why someone preferred one solution to another. Instead we love to hypothesize or proclaim, often on little more than a hunch or coincidental observation. These assertions of why we might prefer one option to another is where arguments start and too many get personally invested in their assertion being correct.
That's really an important point Mark. Some of us dedicate the majority of our lives to the industry because we have an obsession/passion for the science. We'll spend thousands of hours measuring and listening and, most importantly, attempting to correlate what we're measuring to what we're hearing. And for those who have invested these efforts we understand/accept the importance of causation versus correlation. And even more important, we don't form grossly premature conclusions on cherry picked quasi-evidence simply to find some cheap debating advantage on a forum. Even after (approx) 25 years of this...inside, outside, measure, listen, tweak, repeat, over and over and over there's so much I can't say with 100% certainty about so many things. But I see someone going outside with a umik and rew5 for one weekend and that's it...definitive conclusions are now in place.
Then again I better watch what I post because it's all being recorded and in the next mean girls episode someone is going to tattle on me and send you a transcript
Also, my previous post regarding THD versus compression and the audibility of those seem to have confused a few as they quoted Josh saying both can be equally audible as an argument. It may be useful for some to take a step back and try reading what is being posted before rushing into those irrelevant retorts. OF COURSE they *CAN* be equally audible. But that has NOTHING to do with my post which was referencing one specific comparison that was made using specific values.
CEA-2010, literally a 2.5% difference. It was something like 19% versus 21%?
Compression, 3.5dB difference.
In the above scenario a 3.5dB difference will always be audible, even to the most casual listener. The THD difference would be impossible to hear unless there was something very unusual about the THD breakdoiwn. (odds versus evens, etc).
And, per my previous post, if we lower the higher output(cea-2010) so there's no difference in max output. Lowering the funk to the rythmik...then the funk's THD would be significantly less than the 21%(?) it averaged in my example. How much exactly is impossible to say without retesting but half wouldn't be a badd guess. So now, at the same output as the rythmik, it would have about HALF the thd. Say 20% versu 10%. I'm not going to aruge even THAT would be audible to the large majority.
Anyway, I think most are following what I tried to explain. My apologies if I came off short about it, I just have an increasing lower tolerance for snake oil BS these days like anything over 18 inch will be inherently slow or inaccurate. I've never even had a product reach market with a driver bigger than 18 inch, I may never go there. So this isn't about protecting my $$$ interests. It's just the industry has so much BS the consumer has to wade through already there's no need to dump another bucket on them like this.
Power Sound Audio