Cafe Sceptico: The Objectivist Cafe - Page 20

 

 

Some people have a difficult time dealing with facts that put their worldview into question. 

 

It takes a lot of practice / effort, but I've seen at least one person ABX the two (via Foobar) into statistical significance.

 

---

 

Edit:  Don't mind me just walkin' past the cafe.

Edited by kiteki - 12/8/12 at 11:30pm

Stay and have a latte

See the difference though is that person actually did an abx test.

The audiophile life is...difficult.

George Yohng's VST wrapper won't run more than one VST plugin, foobar's built in VST wrapper won't run either

http://www.kvraudio.com/product/reafir_by_cockos

or

http://www.aixcoustic.com/index.php/Electri-Q-posihfopit/30/0/

without crashing, and I absolutely NEED both plugins running for an enjoyable audio experience.

 

The only way I can get them both running right now is through VSTHost, and Virtual Audio Cable simply won't feed it without hiccups.  I can use the Stereo Out recording device to feed it, but then I get a constant noise floor and a messed up impulse response from windows mixer doing its thing.  I try to tell myself it doesn't matter but it's not happening.  What to do?

Get a Creative DAC with the What U Hear device, mine does the stereo mix with -100db in noise level which should be adequate. I can't use it though as my Creative DAC is being used for playback as well 

 

Just found a 5 year old program that does all I want and more

http://download.cnet.com/EffectChainer/3000-2169_4-10669084.html

 

It acts as a VST plugin on the outside but as a VST host on the inside, allowing me to stuff as many plugins as I want into players that previously only support one VST plugin.

I could even use DirectX plugins in a VST host and vice versa should I take the fancy

 

Now the remaining question is, can I insert DirectX plugins into the sound path between applications' default audio output and the actual output--so that I can process all system sounds like this?  If I can figure out a way to do that I would truly be golden

Fancy stuff! let me know if you find a solution, living with VAC for now till I upgrade my DAC.

post in wrong thread >_>

Edited by firev1 - 12/12/12 at 8:12am

Hey guys I have another question. 

 

At what volume are iems measured, and does the Fletcher Munson curve affect measurements in the same way it affects a human ear? I'm curious if the ER4S needs to be played at a particular volume to achieve the bass quantity as graphed, and what that volume would be. 

 

Also, are iems that graph with a bass boost more neutral at low volumes? The GR07 for example. 

 

Thanks in advance. This is an awesome thread. 

Hopefully the volume at which IEMs or headphones are measured doesn't have much impact on the measured amplitude at different frequencies, or else the actual response would be pretty nonlinear. Of course, measure past a certain high volume, and you get higher (nonlinear) distortion as the driver runs out of excursion, and you would expect there to be differences. The microphones don't have some kind of equal-loudness contour of their own (we hope). They should just be flat across the audio range, or at least consistently different across different volumes. That said, the usual caveat about headphones / IEMs measurements and FR compensation for raw measured data still applies. See the various discussions on headphones measurements.

My understanding is that loudness contours describe perception of sound by people, so that's a consideration no matter the actual source of the sound.

Because of this, as you say, at lower volumes maybe a bass boost (also treble, other frequencies to some extent) to match the relative perceived loudness at the intended listening level could sound more neutral. But in what sense is it really neutral if you're playing the music back at an "incorrect" volume? Keep in mind the limitations.

 

It will specify in the graph at which volume the IEM is measured, such as at 1kHz which is usually the point of comparison where they match graphs.  The ER-4S needs to be played at at least 60dB to have any bass whatsoever, lol, IME.

 

I've never read that the microphone or conversion accounts for the volume levels specific to the Fletcher-Munson curve, so no I don't think they account for that.

 

IEM's are very rarely measured at multiple volume levels (since measurements are lazy), but here's one example...

 

 

The UE700 graph kiteki just posted shows that 90dB is required for optimal sound for that iem. That seems very high. If I want to listen at about 70dB, I'd like to know how that volume level will affect FR linearity for the ER4S, and other iems like the GR07. 

 

 

I don't think the microphone itself has to correct for Fletcher Munson, since that UE700 graph seems to show FM in effect with bass and treble roll-off at lower volumes. It must be an inherent quality of sound? 

 

I think this volume thing should definitely be discussed more. It seems like it could be the source of a lot of disagreements on sound signature and general impressions. 

 

The Fl-Mn curve on our hearing is super-different at 100dB compared to 70dB, I thought you meant the compensation applied to the raw measurements has to be compensated differently depending on the volume level the IEM was measured at, to account for the different Fl-Mn curves at different volumes.

 

 

 

It is.  The UE700 has no bass at weak volumes, and distortion in the bass at too high volumes (this is common in TWFK's), so you can only get a nice bass response from it if you listen at a certain volume level, which some people just don't want to, if they want nightclub-like presentation, or if they only listen to background music at 40dB while studying.

 

For nightclub-like volume levels there are some IEM's which perform amazing, which some people will never hear since they don't want to.  Music preference plays a part too, it's why home theatre speakers (for movies) and speakers for classical music are tailored differently.

 

You could come to the conclusion from the above that "it's all subjective, and personal opinion" but I find that a cheap way out.  It's not subjective at all, it's just multi-faceted.  The contrary term "objective" is used a bit weirdly in audio though, imho.  It's like objective in audio means "data and evidence only, or gtfo", or something like that.  Objective simply means truth exists in and of itself, contrary to subjective as if truths exist uniquely depending on your perspective "there are all kinds of truths, there is no such thing as the colour blue, your blue is my green" etc.

I don't understand what you're talking about. The graph posted above with the 3 FR lines show almost identical FR at all three SPLs (90, 100, 110 SPL) but of course rising THD. The bass is flat from 500 Hz to 20 Hz. There's no loudness compensation at all.