Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Audio Discussions
In the Thread: Simpson Microphones thread.
Post Subject: The difference between 'the same' and 'equally real'Posted by Andy Simpson on: 9/13/2008
 tuga wrote:
 Andy Simpson wrote:
Hi Tuga,<BR><BR>I have no argument here.<BR><BR>My main test procedure is to set up the monitors either side of the source and match playback SPL for direct blind comparison.<BR><BR>If the blind listening subjects cannot tell which is real and which is not, then I can ask no more.<BR><BR>The rest is up to the suspension of disbelief mechanism and is outside of my field.<BR><BR>Andy

Andy,

I was thinking if it wouldn't be more efficient if you were to monitor the recording in a "controlled" environment.

Isn't it possible that you are duplicating/superimposing room acoustics during your monitoring (affecting bass assessment and overall balance)?

Best,
Tuga


Tuga,

This is a good point and forces me to explain further.

In recognition of the limitations of the pursuit, my first goal of reproduction is not to reproduce exactly an audio event that is indistinguishable from the real audio event.

Not only is this essentially impossible, but it is also essentially impossible to test.

My primary goal is to reproduce something that is indistinguishable from a real event.

In other words, I expect my blind-test subjects to recognise the difference between the real source and the reproduction, but I do not aim for them to know which is the real source.

For example, if we take the case of reproducing a violin, if the reproduction is somewhat spectrally different to the real violin, I would expect the subject to perceive this as two different violins.

Given ideal frequency domain matching between the two, if the subject can pick one as real and the other as reproduction, the test is a failure.

Similarly, in the case of the incorrect ratio of direct-to-indirect sound (reverb), if the source is perceived as real, the extra reverb will likely simply be perceived as just that - extra real reverb.

My work has lead me to the conclusion that mechanical error in transducers is the primary form of unacceptable distortion, and that only mechanical performance equal to or better than the ear will guarantee that the reproduction will be perceived as a real source.

Direct-radiator microphones OR direct-radiator speakers do not qualify and so introduce mechanical distortion which is noticeable to the ear, causing whatever reproduction to appear unreal.

Andy

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site