Dr. Hans W. Gierlich On The Future of Audio Quality Testing: More Than Just Frequency Response
Apr 28, 2023 at 8:46 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 71
Dr. Hans W. Gierlich On The Future of Audio Quality Testing:
More Than Just Frequency Response



Is looking at a frequency response plot enough to tell you whether or not you'll like a particular headphone? Can someone equally like two headphones that do not sound alike? Is measuring eardrum pressure as a function of frequency from one side of a headphone enough to know how that headphone sounds? We had questions.

In this exclusive interview, Jude sits down with Dr. Hans Gierlich of HEAD acoustics to discuss the innovative MDAQS algorithm, and to ask those questions. MDAQS is a new approach to measuring the quality of audio in a more comprehensive way -- in a way that takes us beyond the eardrum, beyond just frequency response. This is a fascinating discussion about a technology we believe will help shape the future of audio quality measurements.

Referenced videos (below):
 
Apr 29, 2023 at 2:10 AM Post #5 of 71
Thanks for sharing Jude. Cool ideas here of beyond frequency response.
 
Apr 29, 2023 at 2:26 AM Post #6 of 71
Excellent. I've always felt frequency response graphs are a very black or white tool. It's welcome to see a more expanded approach to how we hear music and what constitutes good sound quality.
 
Apr 29, 2023 at 10:23 AM Post #12 of 71
Interesting but I'm not sure why it can't just be about whether the individual likes a certain sound or headphone, all this seems to do is make people buy things that they have not heard based on what someone else has told them.
... but, IMO, there's a place for that 🤷‍♂️

I very seldom have the opportunity to listen to equipment (on my head, or certainly not in my house), so measurements and reviews are pretty much what I have to go on.

Improving the quality of such should be quite useful, to me and others in similar circumstances, shouldn't it?
 
Apr 29, 2023 at 11:40 AM Post #13 of 71
... but, IMO, there's a place for that 🤷‍♂️

I very seldom have the opportunity to listen to equipment (on my head, or certainly not in my house), so measurements and reviews are pretty much what I have to go on.

Improving the quality of such should be quite useful, to me and others in similar circumstances, shouldn't it?
I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad thing but it also has a reverse side whereby excellent products fall by the wayside simply because they don't measure according to a target that we are virtually told that our ears should like, the perfect example for me are the HD820 which I refused to buy due to so much negativity, then I tried them and bought them, they are now my favourite headphone, there are so many variables that I just don't understand why we hold these reviewers in such high esteem when all of their reviews are based on one target. That being said I guess that is what Dr Geirlich is trying to change.
 
Apr 29, 2023 at 11:58 AM Post #15 of 71
Timbre, distortion and immersiveness ... not just frequency response graphs... :thumbsup:

Yes but, I wonder how such a score can be adjusted to your personnel preferences ?
I couldn't see, if margin of possible adjustments of a device was in their calculation (like impacts of frequency adjustments on distortion results is entering in account).
So till now, I think only frequency response can still be rather well adjusted to your personnel target taste with little modern PEQ like PowerampEQ or Wavelet.. It would have been interesting to know the real effect on distortion the modification of frequency response can have).
So the detailed frequency response of a device is probably still more interesting for a buyer to guess if there is still some possibility to reach a preferred response target with some PEQ adjustments.... ?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top