Get Free, Friendly, Expert Advice
Call 1-866-244-8796 or email

Designed and Manufactured in Canada Since 1980


AxiomAudio Blog

Sneak Peek into Axiom’s Current Research and Development

Axiom’s Newest Speaker: The In-Ceiling M3

Outdoor Speaker Placement

Wall'O'Fame
Experimental Atmos
Greetings fellow Axiom owners...
Who's Online
2 registered (tomtuttle, taylormade1ca), 142 Guests and 6 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Financing
Forum Stats
13322 Members
11 Forums
22895 Topics
404586 Posts

Max Online: 378 @ 02/24/13 04:33 PM
Top Posters
Ken.C 17781
pmbuko 16277
SirQuack 13335
CV 11208
MarkSJohnson 10899
Meanwhile On Facebook

󾓶 The first review of the LFR880s is out! "If you are adding or upgrading stere...

So much going on in this month's newsletter - new product announcements, a new v...

Love this comment from Doug T! "The M22 bookshelf speakers sound so clean and a...

󾓶 Andrew has spoken! Big update on the AxiomPlay Wireless Platform on the Axiom...

Page 6 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#116176 - 11/19/05 10:42 PM Re: help with stereo choice
AdamP88 Offline
aficionado

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 639
Loc: Omaha, NE
Really? You were being facetious? Boy, for a second I thought you had finally seen the light!

I was being sarcastic, 2x6. And as far as meeting the challenge, perhaps if your argument was more specific than simply ranting vaguely about "bloom" we could all get somewhere.

What exactly is bloom? It often has a negative connotation (exaggeration, oversaturation - ie color bloom). What may be your bloom might be someone else's bloat. So what is it? Is it midrange presence or warmth? If so that can be measured. But if you can't be bothered to define it beyond "it sounds more real" then what's the point?

Top
#116177 - 11/19/05 11:06 PM Re: help with stereo choice
2x6spds Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 03/16/02
Posts: 2726
Loc: CA, USA
Well Adam, you're free to insult me if you like. See, the problem is that your beloved "more sensitive than the human ear" test equipment is utterly incapable of discerning essential qualities of music, including timbre. You understand that "timbre", is a quality which is psychoacoustic in nature - it is a function of the processor at the receiving end, the human brain - its associated auditory neural network ... all your fancy test equipment can measure is disturbances in the air. Not only that, but the test results relied on by you savants are ususally single tones.

So, KC, Adam, PMB, tell me that (1) timbre does not exist, that (2) it is not a significant component of our perception of music or that (3) you can measure it. The answers are (1) No, timbre exists; (2) Yes, and (3) No, you cannot measure it.

So, what does all your test equipment tell you? It can provide you with a fairly course 'picture' of the qualities of audio components, sort of a broad normal range ... but tells you nothing about the more subtle attributes of audio reproduction systems.

So, fellas, enjoy your test tones.


Edited by 2x6spds (11/19/05 11:07 PM)
_________________________
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.

Top
#116178 - 11/19/05 11:16 PM Re: help with stereo choice
pmbuko Offline
shareholder in the making

Registered: 04/02/03
Posts: 16277
Loc: Leesburg, Virginia
Are you actually trying to say that timbre cannot be measured and only exists in your head? If I understand you correctly, you're implying that a microphone and spectrum analyzer cannot discern between a trumpet playing middle C and an oboe playing the same note. This is a completely ridiculous assertion. If that is not what you meant by timbre, can you please explain?
_________________________
"I wish I had documented more…" said nobody on their death bed, ever.

Top
#116179 - 11/19/05 11:24 PM Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
AdamP88 Offline
aficionado

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 639
Loc: Omaha, NE
Timbre is psycho-acoustic in nature? Are you high?

Timbre is a function of the instrument producing it, not the receiver. It is not some mysterious force that can't be captured through scientific means. As Peter noted, if timbre were a product solely of the receiver, then a microphone would not be able to differentiate between a piano playing middle C and a saxophone playing middle C. What about digital instruments? Are they infused with psycho-acoustic voodoo in order to simulate the timbre of a piano, since obviously microphones can't capture it??

And timbre can be very easily read on a spectrum analyzer. The same way that you can differentiate two people's voices through the use of a spectrum analyzer, you can differentiate two different instruments' timbres through it.

Top
#116180 - 11/19/05 11:54 PM Re: Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
2x6spds Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 03/16/02
Posts: 2726
Loc: CA, USA
OK, so I'm "ranting," and "high," and your spectrum analyzer can measure timbre. Very good, Adam! Funny, I've never seen an audio review which used a 'frequency analyzer' to compare two components for their ability to accurately reproduce timbre, although I have read many where the human reviewer did make such comparisons. Why bother with a messy 'wet' and imprecise piece of equipment like a human hear/brain thing when you can use a 'frequency analyzer' to obtain an objective, verifiable and precise measurement of an audio component's ability to accurately reproduce timbre?


_________________________
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.

Top
#116181 - 11/20/05 12:44 AM Re: help with stereo choice
JohnK Offline
shareholder in the making

Registered: 05/11/02
Posts: 10395
Peter, whatever "bloom" is, it's apparently both elusive(can't be measured by any instruments known to man)and highly fragile(although it's said to be clearly heard in open listening, once the labels and price tags disappear and levels are matched to within 0.1dB in a blind test it evaporates and is gone with the wind).
_________________________
-----------------------------------

Enjoy the music, not the equipment.



Top
#116182 - 11/20/05 01:14 AM Re: Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
2x6spds Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 03/16/02
Posts: 2726
Loc: CA, USA
OK, so timbre can be measured with a frequency analyzer, "bloom," doesn't exist (presumably therefore, can't be measured), "soundstage," "imaging," these either can be measured by a frequency analyzer or don't exist as well?

_________________________
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.

Top
#116183 - 11/20/05 01:51 AM Re: Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
AdamP88 Offline
aficionado

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 639
Loc: Omaha, NE
2x6, could you tell me what you mean by "bloom?"

Top
#116184 - 11/20/05 02:10 AM Re: Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
2x6spds Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 03/16/02
Posts: 2726
Loc: CA, USA
Not really ... it's kind of like defining pornography ... you know it when you see it ... bloom, you like it when you hear it. I guess if you've listened to live viola or cello music you'd know what bloom is, it is a sweet fullness of sound - of musical sound ... I'm sure it does not register on your meter, or if it did, you would not be able to distinguish the cello's bloom from everything else that's going on.

How about sense of space? Do you think your meter can capture that? Have you ever noticed it when listening to a good recording ... a sense of the acoustical 'space' of the venue of the recorded performance as opposed to your listening room?

So, timbre, bloom, imaging, soundstage, sense of acoustic space ... how do you discern these audio qualities from looking at meter or graph or osillyscope? Or, do you just think that because these qualities cannot be objectively demonstrated by your test equipment, they don't exist?

There is a certain nihilism, an arrogant positivism, an oversimple reductionist quality to the argument that if you can't demonstrate an audio effect on your scope it doesn't exist. Perhaps, Adam, your simple test equipment is not adequate to the complexity of the phenomena ... but, they're just sound waves, right? You've got 2 ears and a brain between them to analyze those sound waves ... and respectfully, I think more of my 'test equipment' than your frequency analyzer.

It's really very simple folks. Just because 2 pieces of equipment test the same does not mean they sound the same.


_________________________
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.

Top
#116185 - 11/20/05 02:21 AM Re: Your argument is highly illogical, captain.
AdamP88 Offline
aficionado

Registered: 08/12/03
Posts: 639
Loc: Omaha, NE
Ah, actually if you're referring to a cello or violin, then most likely what you refer to as bloom is a more present midrange. Which can be measured. And can be added via a simple eq'ing

And to further confuse things re: this sense of space you speak of. If you're set on the fact that microphones can't pick up details that our ears can, then how could ANY recording capture a sense of space, since it's recorded using these dreaded microphones?

Top
Page 6 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >



Moderator:  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Home  |  Corporate Info  |  Products  |  Message Board  |  FAQs  |  Warranty  |  Site Map  |  Privacy Statement   |  Contact Us

©2014 Colquhoun Audio Laboratories Limited
All Rights Reserved.