Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: How do we establish "better/best"? (Read 45185 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

How do we establish "better/best"?

Reply #75 –
Quote from: Woodinville on
What do you mean "typical majority"? IT's not even that simple.


Is my whole premise wrong? I guess I am trying to discover if "better/best" ever hinges solely or even partially on engineering specifications.

Take for example the room correction available in Vista.  Is the goal of the room correction to create stable imaging of the soundfield, or is the goal to make the audio presentation sound better? If the room correction does end up making things sound better, surely that was intended? Otherwise, how would a scientist/engineer sell the idea to the bean counters in the first place?

(I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to split hairs here.)

How do we establish "better/best"?

Reply #76 –
Quote from: hellokeith on
Quote from: Woodinville on

What do you mean "typical majority"? IT's not even that simple.


Is my whole premise wrong? I guess I am trying to discover if "better/best" ever hinges solely or even partially on engineering specifications.

Take for example the room correction available in Vista.  Is the goal of the room correction to create stable imaging of the soundfield, or is the goal to make the audio presentation sound better? If the room correction does end up making things sound better, surely that was intended? Otherwise, how would a scientist/engineer sell the idea to the bean counters in the first place?

(I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to split hairs here.)



For engineering purposes and delivering what was intended, engineering specs are entirely relevant.

For what a given individual would LIKE (as oppose to regard as accurate) in a given environment, sometimes yes, sometimes no.

The room correction offers you the option of interchannel matching (not good microphone) or match-to-flat (good microphone).

Match to flat is NOT the best interchannel match. The two problems are quite different, and the same solution does not fit both.

There are other issues in room correction, if you'll see my ppt decks over at www.aes.org/sections/pnw/ppt.htm you'll see some of the other considerations.

After all, lots of people like the distortions in LP's. They get to prefer that. It's all preference at some level.
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston