In Reply to: elaborate more? posted by DrChaos on April 3, 2022 at 17:50:41:
If you look at th data from Toole's tests comparing mono testing to stereo testing you will see a wider dispersion of preferences in mono and substantial deviations in the results from mono to stereo. To conclude that testing in mono is "better" is to conclude that the results in stereo are inaccurate. But they can't be. The tests in stereo are tautologically correct. That's how we listen. So if a speaker tests badly in mono but tests well in stereo as is the case with speaker BB that demonstrates a problem with testing in mono. Laughably the deciples of Toole and Olive conclude that the favorable test in stereo shows that there is something wrong with listening in stereo. It's a pretty absurd conclusion that can only be reached if one takes the belief that testing in mono is "better" as dogma. These test results do not support a lot of their assertions such as people have similar tastes to the point that we can say taste is universally the same more or less. The individual preferences for each speaker is wider than the average differences between the different speakers. IOW the listener preferences are more different than the speakers themselves. It gets even more eratic when you look at preferences with different program material.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: elaborate more? - Analog Scott 04/3/2220:02:01 04/3/22 (5)
- Interesting graph from your link - Feanor 06:23:22 04/4/22 (3)
- RE: Interesting graph from your link - Analog Scott 06:21:11 04/5/22 (1)
- "There is no imaging in mono," he said authoritatively - geoffkait 06:37:21 04/5/22 (0)
- Mono can sound more spacious than stereo. Hel-loo! - geoffkait 08:42:56 04/4/22 (0)
- "That's how we listen" - geoffkait 02:14:11 04/4/22 (0)