Test Equipment vs The Ear


Just posted this link in another thread,

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Sound/earsens.html

Could the ear actually be superior to test equipment?

What do you think?

128x128tls49

Showing 2 responses by shadorne

@williewonka    

I am surprised you are not aware of Soundstage linearity measurements on Speakers.

These show how bad most speakers are. Severely lacking in dynamic range and audibly compressing at 90 DB in most cases.
@williewonka    

Yes. This non linearlity as measured by Soundstage affects dynamic range directly. Acting as a limiter or compressor to the louder sounds. The Speaker will sound dull boomy and congested - nearly all speakers do at louder levels - Soundstage readily admits that the majority of speakers have problems with this test.

Group delay is important - especially in bass where many resonant designs have excessive audible group delay in order to deliver more bass output - however this is not so much a dynamic range effect but a smearing that does muddy the sound.

I n speakers I think transient performance is more related to driver integration, flat frequency response and a lack of coloration or "ringing" from the driver - as a percussion strike has many frequencies that all need to be delivered seamlessly and correctly placed in time. A good test is the waterfall plot - a nice clean waterfall will present transients well and without adding coloration. Electrostatic panels like Quad present transients very well.