Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Has this been done before?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Has this been done before? - Page 2

post #16 of 21
12/23/09 at 12:48am
It doesn't matter for the reason Iniamyen said. We cannot win.

[Wanna assign me a team?]
Reply
post #17 of 21
12/23/09 at 8:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punnisher View Post
You are adding another variable in the chain, making it even harder to detect change.
But if something is truly "audible and not electrically measurable," you need to measure sound. Do you use your headphones to listen to sounds or do you plug the cables into your head and measure voltages somehow? Speaking for myself, I'm more concerned with the sound than with an electrical characteristic or measurement.
Reply
post #18 of 21
12/23/09 at 10:25pm
Everything should be tried just for the heck of it. If I remember what I learned from middle school, there's nothing in the scientific method that says you shouldn't do something just because the chances to succeed are unlikely or even infinitesimally small. I did get an F for trying to test something retardedly impossible on a science project though.
Reply
post #19 of 21
12/23/09 at 10:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iniamyen View Post
But if something is truly "audible and not electrically measurable," you need to measure sound. Do you use your headphones to listen to sounds or do you plug the cables into your head and measure voltages somehow? Speaking for myself, I'm more concerned with the sound than with an electrical characteristic or measurement.
In fact you don't measure sound, you measure air-molecule motion – or finally the electrical signal produced by the microphone. The problem with the detour via amplifier–sound transducer–room acoustics–sound transducer is that you introduce signal inaccuracies many magnitudes higher than the cable characteristics themselves. Measuring resolution will be reduced to a ridiculous percentage.

If you want to judge the sound instead of the signal, you have no choice but to listen instead of measuring.
.
Reply
post #20 of 21
12/24/09 at 2:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ View Post
In fact you don't measure sound, you measure air-molecule motion – or finally the electrical signal produced by the microphone. The problem with the detour via amplifier–sound transducer–room acoustics–sound transducer is that you introduce signal inaccuracies many magnitudes higher than the cable characteristics themselves. Measuring resolution will be reduced to a ridiculous percentage.

If you want to judge the sound instead of the signal, you have no choice but to listen instead of measuring.
.
You're right in that when you measure the sound in a room/headphone it's a lot more "inaccurate" compared to measuring the signal straight from the cable. But this is actually not a problem for our purposes - all we care about are differences, not absolute accuracy. In this case all that needs to happen is that the test conditions are kept constant enough to discern audible changes and the microphone has to be as accurate or more accurate than the ear, which a good mic easily is.
Reply
post #21 of 21
12/24/09 at 3:51am
Thread Starter 
If the recordings are done immediately after one another and with minimal disturbance, it should ensure the only major 'difference' is the changed cable.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Has this been done before?