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: Toole measurements paper (Read 5539 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Toole measurements paper

Reply #1 –
There are a couple of others (not open access) that appear to be interesting, judging by their abstracts:

The Effect of Vision on Psychoacoustic Testing with Headphone-Based Virtual Sound

Modeling Localization of Amplitude-Panned Virtual Sources in Sagittal Planes
Regards,
   Don Hills
"People hear what they see." - Doris Day

Toole measurements paper

Reply #4 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Open access, so I think non-members can view?
http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V63/7_8/#paper1
Good reading.

cheers,

AJ



Worked for me (not a member), thanks!

Please forward to the 6morons guy when you get a chance. Thanks.

cheers,

AJ



Done.  (though I doubt it will survive 'moderation')

Toole measurements paper

Reply #5 –
Some (very amusing) comments have been added to this paper recently. Can non-members view comments on the AES site?
It seems studiophile disorder might be more widespread than I previously thought:
Quote
Mr. Skuruls claims that recording/mixing engineers are unbiased – “as close as it comes to being objective in the absence of a blind test”. The listening ability of recording/mixing engineers was elaborately tested early in my career and published as “Subjective Measurements of Loudspeaker Sound Quality and Listener Performance”, J. Audio Eng. Soc., vol. 33, 1985 (30 years ago!). In those tests, professional recording engineers and producers were mixed in with audiophiles as subjects in double-blind subjective evaluations of loudspeakers intended for use as broadcast/recording monitors. As a result of noting that several of the professionals were unable to repeat their subjective ratings in subsequent randomized presentations, a problem was revealed that is now widely acknowledged, but rarely discussed. Hearing loss is an occupational hazard in the audio business, and, as a result, the opinions offered by people so afflicted are less reliable, and may exhibit more bias than those from people with more normal hearing. The topic is also discussed in sections 17.4 and 19.1.2 in my book.

I do have paper 8029 and it is an excellent read, though it might enrage those who despise Toole's accomplishments and especially and his blind test results, as audio-studiophiles do on every forum.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Toole measurements paper

Reply #6 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
Open access, so I think non-members can view?
http://www.aes.org/journal/online/JAES_V63/7_8/#paper1
Good reading.


Interestingly enough AJ this paper mentions quite a bit of Double Blind Testing. If I was mean, I'd say something snide about the fact that you seem to have overlooked it all.

For future reference, they are good examples what formal references to DBTs look like.

Toole measurements paper

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Interestingly enough AJ this (Toole) paper mentions quite a bit of Double Blind Testing.

Yes this Toole paper has been referenced numerous times on many forums including this one and unlike his book, is free, so even you could have actually read it.

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
most of the evidence that Toole relies on was not developed using DBTs

If I was mean like Trump I'd make fun of your bipolar condition, but I won't.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Toole measurements paper

Reply #8 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
Some (very amusing) comments have been added to this paper recently. Can non-members view comments on the AES site?


Yes.

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?ID=524


Interesting to see Toole's serious response to a guy who spent *3 whole years* "developing a new loudspeaker frequency characteristics correction technology " and who asserts "he most important skill for the sound recording/mixing engineer is to be free of any bias."



Toole measurements paper

Reply #9 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Some (very amusing) comments have been added to this paper recently. Can non-members view comments on the AES site?


Yes.

https://secure.aes.org/forum/pubs/journal/?ID=524


Interesting to see Toole's serious response to a guy who spent *3 whole years* "developing a new loudspeaker frequency characteristics correction technology " and who asserts "he most important skill for the sound recording/mixing engineer is to be free of any bias."


Of course the idea of a living human that is free of bias is ludicrous.

Also interesting to see this: http://aplaudio.com/downloads/Reading_Dr_Toole.pdf

A more complete statement of the author's ideas can be found here: APL Audio article about equalizing speakers

Toole measurements paper

Reply #10 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Of course the idea of a living human that is free of bias is ludicrous.

Most people who are professionally engaged in audio "know" that the sonic changes wrought by nominal changes to room acoustics are readily audible and measurable and can be effectively and reliably managed by trained people based on sighted evaluations.

   

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Also interesting to see this: http://aplaudio.com/downloads/Reading_Dr_Toole.pdf

His studiophile "response" to Tooles response is even more amusing. Sound familiar? 

Loudspeaker manufacturer

Toole measurements paper

Reply #11 –
[quote name='ajinfla' date='Nov 28 2015, 09:01' post='911963']
<snip childish name calling>
/quote]

I fail to see anything really new about his allegedly new measurement techniques.

Most people read Toole's measurement techniques of choice as being consistent with the various means of looking at off axis response.  Geddes directivity measurements are very much to my liking, but in the cosmic scheme of things what new he brought to the table are new means for storing and analyzing them, not the basic need to look at and value them.