Search results
  1. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      I will concede I have no evidence (I don't have a reference to this pianist study, it was an undergraduate research project), although I think it's wrong to compare musician timing errors to speaker group delay. It's not that one swamps the other. It doesn't matter if one is much larger. It...
  2. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      You keep talking about this "accurate playback system." So tell me, which speaker polar radiation pattern is accurate? Should the carpet on your listening room floor be 1" or 2" thick in order to provide accuracy? Which brand of diffusion panel on your back wall is the accurate one?
  3. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      I'm not a very good or well-trained musician, but as far as I can tell there is a fairly well-understood concept and language about rhythmic quality that musicians use to talk to each other. And I'm interested in audio chains that get rhythmic quality right.   Are qualities that musicians...
  4. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      Keep in mind that sound starts as a 3D wavefront and gets changed into one or more signals by a mic setup. Your standard undergrad textbook signals & systems theory doesn't apply until the wavefront becomes a signal. It then gets preserved and moved to a speaker where it becomes a wavefront...
  5. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      Your system is not perfect. I've already listed sources of distortion, the major one being that you aren't reproducing the 3D sound field that was present in the hall.   As long as your system is distorting the music, you are distorting the aesthetics. Distort the details and you distort...
  6. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    You're not interested in characterizing instrument sounds? I've analyzed the evolving spectra of violins (using sound sample in a particular sample library, Vienna Orchestra) in order to synthesize a violin-like sound. It was a nice project. It revealed something about the importance of the...
  7. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      I would agree that it's not a good idea to lump people together--yes, everyone has different beliefs, so there is no single category of "objectivists." However, you've missed my point which is that many people have this paradigm which divides up "music making" and "music reproduction."...
  8. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    An echo does mess with RHYTHMIC QUALITY. A musician chooses their tempo in part based on the quality of the hall reverb. If you make a recording and your recording alters the perceived balance of hall reverb to direct sound (something easy to do depending on mic placement and mic polar...
  9. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    There's nothing vague about what I'm saying from the perspective of someone with musical training. It's interesting how such training alters one's perspective on the science. You see the assumptions in the science. It changes your idea of what a valid study is.   For example that New Yorker...
  10. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    I don't have a survey, but let me address your reference to "objectivists who only look at measurements etc." I don't think anyone who owns an audio system doesn't enjoy it and listen to music. What I object to is this perspective in which phenomena are divided up.   I.e. relegating subjective...
  11. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      I skimmed your reference, and it's not relevant to rhythmic quality. It's about the perception of events as single or double. Nowhere does this paper support your claim that a listener won't notice timing errors in the tens of milliseconds. The question is not whether the event is single or...
  12. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    I did point that out. I asked you what you think my "definition" is, and why it is useless. You stated my definition is useless without stating what you think it is, or why it's useless. I asked you to explain.
  13. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      First of all, the -60 dB decay of a piano is irrelevant to the fact it has a very distinct and sharply defined attack.   That's completely false, to say that a listener wouldn't notice timing that's altered by tens of milliseconds. I was a witness to an experiment back when I was a computer...
  14. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      You're being very vague yourself. Be specific. What do you think my "definition" is? Why can't it be used?
  15. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      This is another misunderstanding among objectivists, that an audio system can't affect the perception of rhythm.   First let's get clear that we are talking about rhythmic QUALITY, not just rhythm. A musician would know what I'm talking about, but in case you don't, imaging someone dancing...
  16. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      Are you entirely rejecting the idea that an artist can judge which reproduction comes closest to the original art? Is this an invalid question, somehow off-limits?
  17. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    Manbear,   I think we are using the word "subjective" differently, and if we account for that, we actually agree.   I think that you think I mean accuracy is "mysterious," "unknowable", "unable to be analyzed" that kind of thing.   But the word subjective, as I have always used it...
  18. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      Let me be clear that I think all of these are testable claims, and should be tested. If they seem nonintuitive to you, I don't have a good collection of references that could change your mind, simply because I don't write them down when I encounter them. My impressions are formed from the...
  19. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

      Thanks for the interesting discussion. We seem to be interested in the same sort of analysis.   You write "you are trying to say that a reproduction is more accurate if the speaker setup's processing emphasizes qualities that the listener is more likely to notice."   No, I didn't say that...
  20. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    Let me try to make this point in a different way. I will describe why the notion of accuracy is subjective.   First, let's make clear we are only talking about the case in which there is an original acoustic event.   Second, let's say that we are comparing two different ways of reproducing...
  21. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    Bigshot, you haven't answered my question. How do you know that nonlinearities in speakers are inconsequential? Why is it all about FR.   For that matter, you are overlooking polar radiation patterns, and as far as "measuring a room" that would require characterizing the 3D wavefront arriving...
  22. raddle

    measurements are models

    Since measurements are incomplete models of a systems behavior, then two systems which measure the same can behave differently. Is a misconception common among objectivists that measurements completely characterize the behavior of the system; that is, a misconception that measurements can...
  23. raddle

    why I'm a subjectivist

    "Preference" and "accuracy" are two different things. Both are subjective.   I have some musical training and I've noticed over the years that musical training is a way of practicing using my attention in certain ways. There is a very deep unconscious process that goes on--at very deep levels...
  24. raddle

    measurements are models

    The reason I think it's important to understand measurements as models is this: I think there are certain phenomena that the current state of sound science fails to explain. I think that sound science is consistent-- it's a set of observations and theories that reinforce each other. I think it...
  25. raddle

    measurements are models

    Everyone here is using a different meaning of "model" so it's a bit confused. I'm using the sense described in the Wikipedia entry on "Scientific Modeling" -- the essence of it is some kind of construct (mathematical or not) that represents some part of reality (or some part of a more complex...
Top