[pinnahertz]

"Observations on the Audibility of Acoustic Polarity", R. A. GREINER, AES Fellow, AND DOUGLAS E. MELTON.  J.AudioEngSoc. , ,Vol.42,No.4, 1994 April.
 
Listening tests performed, concluded that polarity differences were audible with waveforms of significant asymmetry.  Even order distortion products make it worse.
 
Excerpts:
 
"If asymmetry of the waveform is important in relation to hearing polarity inversion, then several precautions and warnings about loudspeaker systems are in order.  HIgh values of even-order distortion, that is, second, fourth, etc., in a sound system might make polarity more audible.....
 
What reduces the ability to hear acoustic polarity inversion as the music signal becomes more complex? One factor is simply the complexity of the music itself.  There is often too much going on to allow human concentration on subtle effects.  Since the perception of inversion seems to manifest itself through changes in both timbre and pitch, the normal musical playing of a note, such as vibrato, tremolo, and instrumental filigree, may significantly obscure the inversion effects in most cases....
 
While polarity inversion is not easily heard with complex musical program material, as our large-scale listening tests showed, it is audible in many simplified musical settings."
 
The included references detail several fairly early listening tests that confirm Greiner's findings.  Most references are from the early 1980s and before.  
 
The audibility (or lack thereof) of phase inversion is not new.  

 

[WindowsX]

  Perhaps you still don't understand:  With some signals you WILL get 100% in a DBT, with others you won't, not even 50%, and others in between.  It isn't a question of if a phase inversion can be detected, it's  question of what signals are used.  Speakers or headphones don't matter.  
 
And no, I don't need to do the DBT...done, proven, even historically. 

 
I understand phase polarity test signal can make 100% DBT what I'm curious if listening to actual music can archive reliable result too. If you say not even 50% with actual music, that means most DBTs that use actual music aren't reliable enough and we should stick with only proper signal for DBTs from now on.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 

[pinnahertz]

   
I understand phase polarity test signal can make 100% DBT what I'm curious if listening to actual music can archive reliable result too. If you say not even 50% with actual music, that means most DBTs that use actual music aren't reliable enough and we should stick with only proper signal for DBTs from now on.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

Actual music IS the test signal.  The audibility of phase is dependant on what kind of music/instruments are used.  
 
I've never suggested anything other than music and speech as test signals, and none of the testing reference in the above AES paper used anything but music. 
 
The range of audibility in a DBT with music runs from 50% to 100%.  It is dependant on the specific music content. 

 

[bfreedma]

Instead of worrying about this, how about performing a proper DBT with Fidelizer.

 

[WindowsX]

That's not a bad idea. How about we compare two recordings from Vinyl playback with/without Fidelizer used and let audience decide what they prefer? Let me know when you want to host this kind of test. I'm interested.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 

[bfreedma]

  That's not a bad idea. How about we compare two recordings from Vinyl playback with/without Fidelizer used and let audience decide what they prefer? Let me know when you want to host this kind of test. I'm interested.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 
 
As always, you expect someone else to do your testing for you.  And why in the world would we do it with vinyl even if I did want to do all the heavy lifting?
 
Nevermind... II should have known better.  I'm out.

 

[WindowsX]

   
 
As always, you expect someone else to do your testing for you.  And why in the world would we do it with vinyl even if I did want to do all the heavy lifting?
 
Nevermind... II should have known better.  I'm out.

 
Well, you proposed it. I thought you took interests in making Fidelizer DBTs. I guess I could say the same to you, throwing your ideas and expect me to do all things to please you. Talking about hypocrisy suits you best.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 

[pinnahertz]

  Instead of worrying about this, how about performing a proper DBT with Fidelizer.

What does that have to do with the subject of this thread?

 

[castleofargh]

 

  Perhaps you still don't understand:  With some signals you WILL get 100% in a DBT, with others you won't, not even 50%, and others in between.  It isn't a question of if a phase inversion can be detected, it's  question of what signals are used.  Speakers or headphones don't matter.  
 
And no, I don't need to do the DBT...done, proven, even historically. 

 
I understand phase polarity test signal can make 100% DBT what I'm curious if listening to actual music can archive reliable result too. If you say not even 50% with actual music, that means most DBTs that use actual music aren't reliable enough and we should stick with only proper signal for DBTs from now on.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

no it does not mean that "most DBTs that use actual music aren't reliable enough and we should stick with only proper signal for DBTs from now on."
what you're suggesting is pretty much "let's do the test where the result is what I want it to be".
if you do a test with a specific signal then the result is about the audibility of that specific signal. that's what pinnaherts keeps explaining to you, the audibility is dependent on conditions.  if you care about the audibility of something like inverted polarity when listening to music, then obviously the DBT should be done with a variety of actual music, not with some specific test signal. decide what you're testing and then prepare a test for that specific objective.
 if you test a music and people fail to reliably notice a difference with that music in that test, then the conclusion is that people fail to reliably notice the change with that music and that test. that does in no way invalidate the test itself or the conditional conclusions that come from it. what's wrong is trying to take a specific test and make a global conclusion outside of the conditions of that test.

 

[WindowsX]

pinnahertz told me it's possible to get 100% DBTs with some signal for phase polarity but not for others, not even 50% or something between. It's not me who suggested such things like I wanna hear. I merely interpret what he told me. All I asked was about result of past DBTs related to phase polarity.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 

[castleofargh]

and that's what it means, each test is relevant for the signal it specifically tested. people are more sensitive to some signals than others. and like with everything else, a lot less sensitive when actual music is being played. it's to be expected of almost anything we would test, be it timing cues, masking, noise... some specific signals will be more noticeable than other and when the audio "message" becomes more complex, the brain tends to have other priorities and many aspects of the sound will be acoustically masked or judged irrelevant by the brain and dismissed.  there is one very specific signal(one you can't possibly encounter in real music) that let us identify very short timing cues for example. with any other signal, people need way longer delays before they would notice anything, and while playing music it's again another magnitude before anything is noticeable.
all the tests showing those variations are relevant, they just don't test the same things. so as we tend to listen to music, we usually get concerned with the results we get on tests with a variety of music files. it seems logical to me and with polarity and music it's likely that people will not notice or care.
 
doing a few measurements of IEMs from time to time, I've seen quite a few pairs with inverted polarity(both sides inverted, I never found any pair with only one side inverted as expected because that is indeed very noticeable even with music), for some the user didn't know how to plug the cable. it happens a lot on custom IEMs and people certainly worry a lot about it when the cable can be inverted without any clear physical indication of the proper way. but while oh so very worried like I was when I got my first pair of CIEM, the obvious fact that we usually can't tell by ear with music playing is evidence enough that it really doesn't matter all that much. sometimes I've seen it with non removable cables too. meaning the manufacturer himself didn't give a fudge. I've had a pair of fitear with inverted polarity, and there is some irony in such a situation as they specifically use a plug that can't be reversed. ^_^ so that's not disregard but a clear mistake.
still, none of the people sending me those pairs for measurements knew or suspected inverted polarity and I honestly can't say that while listening to music with those IEMs I could notice anything special. even when I felt like there was a difference, I couldn't tell which was the right one.
 
 I remember reading something on the web about a guy claiming that albums were often inverted(no idea if that's true). yet here we are and nobody really cares or seems to notice.

 

[gregorio]

  [1] I merely interpret what he told me.
[2] If you say not even 50% with actual music, that means most DBTs that use actual music aren't reliable enough and we should stick with only proper signal for DBTs from now on.
 

 
1. Now that's a lie! You are not "interpreting" what pinnahertz stated, you are changing what he said and then drawing completely erroneous conclusions based on those changes to fit your agenda. This is a common ploy amongst audiophiles, which frequently has it's roots in those seeking to exploit audiophiles. The question isn't whether or not you lied to fit your agenda, it's whether you lied inadvertently (because you are incapable of understanding "what he told me") or whether you lied deliberately?
 
2. Pinnahertz did NOT say "not even 50% with actual music", he said that it depends on the symmetry of the music/signal. Taking what pinnahertz actually said, rather than what you have invented/changed, if anything, actually leads to the exact opposite of your illogical, self-serving conclusion.
 
What you appear to be doing is the exact opposite of "science", it's what science was invented to combat! Have you ever thought of going into politics? Your ability to change/misinterpret what is actually said (to suit your agenda) would be highly rewarded, probably even more highly rewarded than exploiting gullible audiophiles!
 
G

 

[pinnahertz]

 
 I remember reading something on the web about a guy claiming that albums were often inverted(no idea if that's true). 

Inverted relative to what?  Nobody has any idea if albums are inverted or not, because absolute phase cannot be established from any single point in the chain.  You'd need two points: acoustic sample in the studio, and the final output of the play chain.  Nobody has both.  Simply no way to tell at the release end of the pipe alone, though, without a reference.  There could be an asymmetrical acoustic reference, sort of a "phase stamp", placed at the head of every recording that would thumb-print the absolute polarity, but that's never happened, more will it ever.  
 
It's ambiguous, always has been, always will be.