Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Golden ear training

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Golden ear training

    Originally posted by gregbegland View Post
    We went through the frequency ID test part in one of our audio club meetings. This played all of the 10 bands of octave band pink noise in order and then asked you to identify the frequency band of the following randomly ordered tracks. As self-reported, all of the club members did pretty well on this test, not that it was incredibly hard.

    You could make a CD set like golden ears pretty easily on your own with Audacity. Start with pink noise and do some boosts and cuts of various levels, then move to music of several styles boost and cut and distortion of various types and then if you have patience, move to more than 10 bands. ;)

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Golden ear training

      Originally posted by dantheman View Post
      The only thing you have to remember when listening to a recording through your speakers is that you are not listening to a live event. You are listening to a recording of some event that is manipulated in a massive manner straight from the microphone placement on down the line to the mastering engineer's studio.

      The most accurate way to assess loudspeakers might actually be to graph them. Of course a comprehensive set of measurements is beyond most of the DIY community. "might" is an understatement. Of course you then have to know how to interpret the graphs. Sounds like you've read the best book on the subject.

      Getting an EQ and fiddling with it is actually a very good way to train the ear. Cut/boost bands and adjust the Q of the filter and listen to what happens to the sound. When you get it down pat what happens when you cut/boost one band, go to 2 and then 3 and on down the line.

      It's definitely much simpler and faster to graph and a more stable, objective way to do it.

      Just my opinion,

      Dan
      It's always great to get a plot of the actual response, but that alone should not dictate when one is "done" with a particular crossover. There's many versions of "flat" since no real world speaker is free of "wiggles" here and there. The measurement I consider a starting point, from which one adjusts for best sound with small changes to values followed by long listening sessions with a variety of recordings.

      Sometimes (rarely) the first version of a crossover made after taking on-baffle response plots is the last version. Most of the time, listening will cause the alteration of the first "flat response" crossover, in favor of another "flat response" crossover with a different character to the overall tone and balance.

      I like to think about a speaker design like a recipe created by a chef. I don't know about you, but I'd rather my gourmet meal be prepared by a human being with actual taste buds, than a computer chef.
      R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

      Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


      95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
      "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Golden ear training

        Flat FR doesn't mean good phase, either. With an EQ you can really muck things up by shooting for flat awhile not knowing what is going on in terms of phase. I've seen people try to fix comb filtering with an EQ... Change a band by 6dB, then wonder why it sounds so bad even though it's "flat".

        Mark K has a good writeup on linear distortion and is the only person I've seen extrapolate phase in to the discussion.
        http://www.audioheuristics.org/prime...distortion.htm
        When you stop caring about being right, you might actually learn something.

        My test data site:
        http://medleysmusings.com/

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Golden ear training

          Listening to acoustic music (i.e. a band or skilled friend playing the guitar), listening to any sound that might be recorded, and listening to good recordings on good speakers works for me. I hear things the average Joe doesn't and I've never heard one musician think my speakers are off. For example, when I listen to a song or watch a youtube clip and a voice scares the $HIT out of me because I think someone is literally next my ear, it sounds real. I don't play instruments, but that doesn't mean my senses aren't up to par. Listening on good proven speakers is a decent start.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Golden ear training

            It's always great to get a plot of the actual response, but that alone should not dictate when one is "done" with a particular crossover. There's many versions of "flat" since no real world speaker is free of "wiggles" here and there. The measurement I consider a starting point, from which one adjusts for best sound with small changes to values followed by long listening sessions with a variety of recordings.

            Sometimes (rarely) the first version of a crossover made after taking on-baffle response plots is the last version. Most of the time, listening will cause the alteration of the first "flat response" crossover, in favor of another "flat response" crossover with a different character to the overall tone and balance.

            I like to think about a speaker design like a recipe created by a chef. I don't know about you, but I'd rather my gourmet meal be prepared by a human being with actual taste buds, than a computer chef.
            I've yet to hear a bad flat, but your point is taken: nothing is perfectly flat so there is some wiggle room in there and you may prefer on wiggle over another. Do I have you correct?

            Dan
            "guitar polygamy is a satisfying and socially acceptable alternative lifestyle."~Tony Woolley
            http://dtmblabber.blogspot.com/
            http://soundcloud.com/dantheman-10

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Golden ear training

              Originally posted by ErinH View Post
              Flat FR doesn't mean good phase, either. With an EQ you can really muck things up by shooting for flat awhile not knowing what is going on in terms of phase. I've seen people try to fix comb filtering with an EQ... Change a band by 6dB, then wonder why it sounds so bad even though it's "flat".

              Mark K has a good writeup on linear distortion and is the only person I've seen extrapolate phase in to the discussion.
              http://www.audioheuristics.org/prime...distortion.htm
              Check out this study done on phase distortion:
              http://www.music.miami.edu/programs/...f_contents.htm

              Dan
              "guitar polygamy is a satisfying and socially acceptable alternative lifestyle."~Tony Woolley
              http://dtmblabber.blogspot.com/
              http://soundcloud.com/dantheman-10

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Golden ear training

                Originally posted by dantheman View Post
                I've yet to hear a bad flat, but your point is taken: nothing is perfectly flat so there is some wiggle room in there and you may prefer on wiggle over another. Do I have you correct?

                Dan
                There's also the overall balance top to bottom. Flat is subjective, and over the entire range, a 1dB shelf starting at 500Hz for example is audibly discernible, yet the measurement could still be considered flat. Both might sound quite good, but certainly, not the same.
                R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

                Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


                95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
                "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Golden ear training

                  No doubt Pete. Good point.

                  Dan
                  "guitar polygamy is a satisfying and socially acceptable alternative lifestyle."~Tony Woolley
                  http://dtmblabber.blogspot.com/
                  http://soundcloud.com/dantheman-10

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X