1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Skeptico Saloon: An Objectivist Joint

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by gnarlsagan, Jun 27, 2013.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Next
 
Last
  1. gnarlsagan
    Thought we could use a new hang out. Keep close fellas. The night is dark and full of terrors. 
     
    maverickronin, MygpuK and trick like this.
  2. Joe Bloggs Contributor
  3. Greenleaf7
    Subbed as well
     
  4. Joe Bloggs Contributor
    Does anyone have the link to the study where they EQed different headphones to sound like each other and asked listeners to grade their sound quality? The result being that when frequency responses were made similar sound quality became similar as well?
     
    MygpuK likes this.
  5. gnarlsagan

    I'd be interested in seeing it.

    Also I came across an enlightening read on why the piano only goes up to ~4.1kHz. For some reason I thought for sure it would be higher. http://music.stackexchange.com/questions/6229/why-is-the-highest-frequency-on-a-piano-4186-hertz

    The piano is definitely one of the most interesting instruments regarding FR. I've also read that the notes aren't evenly spaced frequency wise. They were tuned by ear! Crazy.
     
  6. jcx
    Quote:
     
    and there's also the example of the Smyth Realizer...
     
  7. mikeaj
    Quote:

     
    Extended range pianos were attempted (in the modern day) but never really caught on. For one, the extra keys extending out both directions confuse people who are used to the standard 88. And there's pretty much no music written to take advantage of the extra ones, not like they would have too much sonic contribution. Have you tried playing the top key on the standard set? It doesn't carry that well anyway.
     
    Recall that keyboard instruments have evolved quite a bit since say the 1600s though not much (in terms of keys and so on) since the late 19th century. A lot of the earlier music is written for instruments that don't have modern pedals or even the modern range of keys.
     
    Piano tuning is a whole topic in of itself. Let's just say that there are tradeoffs involved if you want the tuning to work for being able to play in multiple key signatures.
     
     
    I'm pretty sure this isn't the study being referenced (edit: looks like jcx got it), but doesn't the latest paper out of Harmon's labs (Sean Olive and co.) cover different EQ targets using two different headphones? EQ is changed to match different responses like diffuse field, the proposed speakers-response-based one, and others. I don't know if there's a comparison between the different headphones once EQed to be similar.
     
  8. xnor
    Oh hai there, thanks for re-opening the saloon.
     
  9. gnarlsagan

    Woah! Welcome back! :D
     
  10. Happy Camper
    Welcome back xnor. :smile:
     
  11. xnor
    I was never gone!
     
     
    Regarding equalizing headphones, there might also be some useful info in Olive/Welti's latest paper. Not free though.
     
  12. audionewbi
    I am on board.
     
  13. Joe Bloggs Contributor
    Quote:
     
    Doesn't read like the paper did quite what he claimed though?  For one FIR filter != EQ.  For another, the original headphone scored higher than its simulation by another headphone (this goes both ways, the Stax simulating the crap phone scored lower than the crap phone itself too? Lol).  I didn't quite get whether this last bit was a significant difference though.
     
  14. bigshot
    cafe, saloon... the next one will have to be a tea room!
     
  15. esldude
    Quote:
    Well, there is also parlor, halfway house, convention, enclave, coffee shop and doubtless more. 
     
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Next
 
Last

Share This Page