Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: Fine.

You said:
"That's a grad student summing up the Lipshitz experiments. Did you not manage to read it?
"

and now you are backtracking, saying:

"Sorry the misunderstanding. No one said this thesis is about Lipshitz & audibility of polarity or anything like that"

Excuse me but the quote above clearly points out that you WERE saying that the thesis is about Lipshitz and the Thesis IS about audibility of phase inversion. Why lie now? Just admit you were wrong. I seriously think you didn't bother to read what was in fact a very interesting thesis.

Is this a simple misquote, like JA made 20 years ago, or are you deliberately trying to deceive me??

"that it helps people to understand that there is only one (as far as I have been able to establish) such research reported by Lipshitz"

I think everyone got that...a long time ago. Who gives a Lipshitz?

Look, it is all very transparent what you are attempting to do. You are not the noble policeman trying to protect us from misinformation. You have a clear agenda to embarrass a man for a misquote in an article from nearly 20 years ago. Your agenda is to try to "expose" his supposed agenda and it is malicious and grasping at little fine details in an attempt to say "gotcha". Pathetic.

Everyone can do the simplistic math and yes you are correct that with music only 53% were correct but that is not the way the data was presented and give the TOTAL of test signal and music the audibility fit a 99% confidence limit. All this proves is the fallability of reporting statistics without taking everything into account. So you are the big genius who figured that little clever bit out? Good for you. I don't have access to this report so I had to assume that 84/137 was for music and tones but not how it broke down.

"This is a make-believe world anyway as it seems"

No, this is where you are wrong and it is fundamental to the problem here. You sneer at people who claim to hear differences when they change things in their systems. The reality is that often time there IS a difference in the sound and yes it is usually "very subtle". But you know the human brain has a funny way of "locking onto" signals that while subtle become MUCH more obvious once consciously noticed. To some people these things become very pleasant or actively annoying. To others less sensitized they are irrelevant. I will assume you fall into the latter category but you should accpet the fact that there are those whose hearing is attuned better to noticing and finding importance in subtle effects.

The thesis you posted states very clearly that they found the results HIGHLY listener dependent.

"The audibility of phase distortion in audio signals was also highly dependent upon individual ability, although for statistical analysis individual data was not considered. For example, while most test subjects were very good at recognizing what was in general perceivable as phase distortion such as the impulse and the 70 Hz sawtooth wave, a few others had greater difficulty. Specifically, a few subjects seemed to hear clearly the presence of phase distortion in the jazz-vocal test signal for the headphone listening test, while a few test subjects seemed to perceive phase distortion better than others during the loudspeaker listening test."

Now maybe you are one of the ones that would have trouble with the sawtooth pattern but that doesn't mean its not audible, just to you.

It brings up many questions though about the statistical results reported in this thesis (if we really want to break it down like you have the Lipshitz results). If it is highly listener dependent then it suggests that SOME of the listeners were able to reliably detect phase distortion with TONES AND MUSIC. This means for these listeners the effect was not "Very subtle" but rather "readily audible". For those stone ears who couldn't even tell the sawtooth, well I am sure they drag the whole data down into statistical irrelevancy resulting in the authors to confirm "very subtle" when in fact it is very subtle for some, impossible for others and readily audible for a few. Did Lipshitz break it down for individual listeners, looking for individual outliers?

You know how you treat statistical data from listening is not how you treat data for weighing things or measuring voltages etc. The individual response is relevant. Maybe you will learn this and maybe not.



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]