Cafe Sceptico: The Objectivist Cafe - Page 21

Actually the graph shows two different things - Frequenzgang means frequency response - obviously, but Klirr means distortion and that's the three lower lines on the graph. They look suspicious though, usually there's higher distortion in the low frequencies. But thats besides the point. The FR is exactly the same at different levels, it's the ear that's not linear.

Yeah, Austrians speak german too. ;)

Klirr = THD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnarlsagan 

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. 

... I think the graph is showing two measurements.  The top 3 lines with straight lines in the bass are FR at 90/100/110dB.  The bottom 3 lines with bass curving down are... something else.  Distortion?  Transducers' output SPL is proportional to input power at all listenable volumes.  If the input/output relationship changes enough to affect the frequency balance the distortion levels would be so high that that's what you'd notice first.

Yes the lower 3 lines are the corresponding THD lines.

Is anyone here well versed enough in psychology to explain how one can have a placebo effect opposite to the expected direction, e.g. preferring a $10 printer cable to a $200 audiophile USB cable?  Or for that matter having any differential placebo effect at all when one doesn't expect a difference?

I thought the graph was six different volume levels, I see now it's colour coded and Klirrrr = dissonance or whateverz =)

Well, the UE700 really does suck in the bass response at too low or too high volume, you have to find the sweet spot, but I guess that graph wasn't showing us that.

The Fletcher-Ransom curve was a different subject not directly related to the UE700.  I was saying the Fletcher curve looks very different at 70dB and 100dB as in like here --> http://www.customanalogue.com/elsinore/elsinore_images/Fletcher-Munson_700W.gif

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs 

Is anyone here well versed enough in psychology to explain how one can have a placebo effect opposite to the expected direction, e.g. preferring a $10 printer cable to a $200 audiophile USB cable?  Or for that matter having any differential placebo effect at all when one doesn't expect a difference?

Your consciousness is telling you the audiophile cable will sound better, and your sub-consciousness (inner-guilt) is desiring the printer cable should sound better?  Or the printer cable is coloured red, which you associate with wine and rare steak.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki 
The Fletcher-Ransom curve was a different subject not directly related to the UE700.  I was saying the Fletcher curve looks very different at 70dB and 100dB as in like here --> http://www.customanalogue.com/elsinore/elsinore_images/Fletcher-Munson_700W.gif

I guess you're talking about Fletcher-Munson / equal-loudness curves. These are made using single, pure tones. If you use pink noise, which has a more comparable spectrum to music, the resulting curves will look quite different.

How do you even make an equal loudness curve measurement using pink noise?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs 

Is anyone here well versed enough in psychology to explain how one can have a placebo effect opposite to the expected direction, e.g. preferring a $10 printer cable to a $200 audiophile USB cable?  Or for that matter having any differential placebo effect at all when one doesn't expect a difference?

That depends - if the subject(s) can reliably differentiate the two cables on multiple tests, they may just prefer one over the other.

For that matter, why is there an expected direction? Another hypotheses is that there will be no difference/preference when tested blind.

If they can't reliably differentiate them, their preference is meaningless and calling it placebo isn't exactly appropriate.

Further, if they refuse or are unable to test the reliability of their differentiation, then their preference is similarly meaningless - they can't get the marketing copy out of their heads or can't get over the sky-high price.

The question raised by gnarlsagan was does the ER-4S have to be played at a specific volume to attain their stated 94% accuracy, to linear response in the diffuse field?

The answer is yes, frequency extension sucks at low volume.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph0rk 

 

That depends - if the subject(s) can reliably differentiate the two cables on multiple tests, they may just prefer one over the other.

 

For that matter, why is there an expected direction? Another hypotheses is that there will be no difference/preference when tested blind.

 

If they can't reliably differentiate them, their preference is meaningless and calling it placebo isn't exactly appropriate.

 

Further, if they refuse or are unable to test the reliability of their differentiation, then their preference is similarly meaningless - they can't get the marketing copy out of their heads or can't get over the sky-high price.

What do you call a preference for A over B when A and B are known to be different only in appearance then?

And how to explain a listener expecting A to be superior to B (even though they are the same) but ending up preferring B in a listening "test"?  Or a listener expecting A and B to sound the same but ending up preferring any one of them at all?  That was my question.  I take for granted that A and B are in fact sonically identical and can't possibly be ABXed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki 

The question raised by gnarlsagan was does the ER-4S have to be played at a specific volume to attain their stated 94% accuracy, to linear response in the diffuse field?

 

The answer is yes, frequency extension sucks at low volume.

No, the accuracy is the same at all sane volumes.  It's just that this stated accuracy doesn't account for the missing 6dB headphone bass effect.  Because of the equal loudness contour change effect this bass deficiency is more noticeable at low volumes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki 

The question raised by gnarlsagan was does the ER-4S have to be played at a specific volume to attain their stated 94% accuracy, to linear response in the diffuse field?

 

The answer is yes, frequency extension sucks at low volume.

The answer is no. The FR doesn't suddenly roll-off at a lower SPL. The low end response is virtually flat regardless of SPL, measured objectively. mikeaj answered that already.

A good level to listen with flat studio monitors is ~80 dB SPL. That doesn't damage your hearing even if you listen for hours. If you listen at (much) lower SPLs, you might have to add a slight loudness EQ curve, or get a headphone with slightly V-shaped FR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs 

Is anyone here well versed enough in psychology to explain how one can have a placebo effect opposite to the expected direction, e.g. preferring a $10 printer cable to a $200 audiophile USB cable?  Or for that matter having any differential placebo effect at all when one doesn't expect a difference?

Expecting and wanting to hear a difference are two different things. The latter happens consciously, but the former does not, and for that reason cannot reliably be controlled other than by making the test blind. However, it is the (subconscious and sometimes unpredictable) expectation that affects what one hears. For example, the McGurk effect can work even while one actually wants to ignore it. That is why common excuses like "I wanted A to sound better than B, but B still sounded better" do not make the results of sighted testing valid. In the USB cable example above, it is possible for the audiophile to be secretly worried about the quality of the $200 cable (for whatever reason), and actually expect it to sound worse without consciously realizing it.