 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
83.84.181.88
In Reply to: Acoustic polarity, again posted by KlausR. on May 6, 2007 at 02:36:41:
For some unknown reason you have deleted your post so I post my reply here.I went to the IEEE website and downloaded the paper in pdf-format. I had a look and to be sure I used the Adobe search function:
the term "polarity" is not mentioned. The paper further does not describe listening tests where signals other than artificial or synthesized were used.
What conclusion was I supposed to draw from this paper considering the current context which is consumers/music lovers/audiophiles listening to MUSIC.
Klaus
Follow Ups:
Klaus, please note the date of the paper's publication. We had not refined the terminology yet. However, 'VII Monoaural Phase Sensitivity' is a good start. This starts on page 1344.
After this, why not contact Manfred Schroeder and ask him yourself. He hangs out in Germany somewhere. In fact, one book by him says that he spends time in Berkeley Heights, CA (hey maybe that is near where I live) and Goettingen Germany. Of course, this was a few years ago.
It's not a matter of terminology. Phase inversion is described, but for the second of two test tones which are then played in combination, such as in chapter "F".I have no doubts at all that polarity inversion is clearly audible with test tones but the question is, how relevant are test tones for music lovers? And Schroeder simply doesn't mention listening tests where music was used.
We know about Greiner's results where "inversion of acoustic polarity is clearly audible for some intruments played in some styles and for some listening situations" and where "polarity inversion is not easily heard with normal complex musical program material, as our lage-scale listening tests showed".
Lipshitz also has performed tests with music, not only test tones, so the results of these tests would be interesting. But since Clark is reluctant to provide that information...
Klaus
Oh, now: 'Absolute polarity exists but it's not important!' Next, you will have invented it.
Re: 'Absolute polarity exists but it's not important!AS a matter of fact, yes, that is essentially the core message. When controlled listening tests show that polarity inversion is audible on some selected signals but not on normal music program material, then I ask you why should those people who do listen to normal music program material worry about polarity?
Or is there something I'm still missing?
Klaus
Klaus: There are three phases to a new idea.
1. It doesn't exist.
2. It exists, but it is not important.
3. We invented it.
Europeans are especially adept at this, from my experience.
I was only reflecting the 3 times some European engineer took my friendly input and ran with it, without reference to me. It has not happened as much in the USA, percentage wise.
The 3 phases of an idea is in 'Murphy's Laws', and is a standard parable in the engineering world.
What does that have to do with the issue being discussed and my questions? Please note that FACTS can convince or good reasoning. So far, I'm not seeing any of those here.Please answer the question, why should anyone bother if polarity inversion is audible only with test signals? And what does the Schroeder paper tell the reader about polarity?
Klaus
Just read and think about your most recent statements about absolute polarity. The answer is there. If you are so dense that you cannot accept absolute polarity and that it might be important to some people, well, tough nuts! You are ignoring what I have known and worked with for more than 30 years. It is just a waste of time to put any real effort to get you to appreciate this, and I have better things to do and say.
And you still did not answer my questions. What does the Schroeder paper say about polarity inversion on real music, because that's the only issue that matters here.Read after me : I DO ACCEPT ABSOLUTE POLARITY. I also accept that it might be important to some people. However, unless there has been provided solid evidence in controlled listening tests using real music played through appropriate audio systems I think that these people are subject to self-delusion. Self-delusion in the sense that they might use, unawaringly, audio systems which make polarity inversion easily audible by adding e.g. distortion.
Klaus
Sorry, Berkeley Heights is in NJ, far far away from mere CA.
.
.
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
