Re: TT Dynamic Range meter "lies" about vinyl's dynamic rang Reply #100 – 2016-03-30 13:23:54 Quote from: Isabelxxx on 2016-03-30 12:04:29And again, if this thread is about the Tool NO ONE can make a claim about it lying or reporting wrong results. That's false and misleading....Even if 75% of this forum or this thread is true, and greynol is most times right that doesn't mean the forum or Greynol's word equates The Truth.Aww, c'mon! Nobody has claimed that the thread title or greynol represents "The Truth". If you make a ridiculous exaggeration, it is your own fault. Most fair-minded people know very well how the thread title is meant to be understood. There's no TOS paragraph that would prevent formulating a provocative thread title.Quote.... so this thread is all about how the tool DOES NOT measure Dynamic Range. Now you say it does it right (?). Great.Huh?Which meaning of the term "dynamic range" are you presuming now?The entire problem revolves around the discrepancies arising from mixing up various different meanings of this term. Once you or anybody else start to distinguish them properly and clearly, the problem goes away.QuoteEither it measures dynamics range and you have to accept filters and playback affects the dynamic range of a signal or what you are measuring is another thing. But you can not maintain both claims according to what you want to prove just to say to some of the audiophiles: f**ck you! They deserve. ok.. but that's not the right way of proving nothing.Stop your rambling and start to think! There is absolutely no contradiction in what I wrote once you acknowledge that the tool doesn't measure perceived dynamic range, but measures something that has a technical definition, which does not directly relate to perception. If people interpret the measurement result such that they infer a certain perception, they are mistaken. That's what Ian argues quite correctly. If the tool itself would suggest or foster this misinterpretation, it could conceivably be called "lying", even if the measured result is technically correct.This is quite similar to a thermometer not giving you a measure of the perceived temperature, since temperature perception varies with a number of other factors. If the thermometer purported to tell you the perceived temperature, it would be lying.Not hard to grasp, is it?QuoteAgain the "real" definition of Dynamic Range needs not clarification. A CD has less SNR. If the same master is used in vinyl and CD, the CD wins. End. If this thread is here is because there is more to what we understand as Dynamic Range. There is perception and we are trying to measure it. Don't say now you don't want to discuss it.There's no one "real" definition of dynamic range. There are several meanings to it, depending on the context. Measuring the dynamic range of a production has nothing to do with the dynamic range the recording medium offers. Same word, different meanings. The perceived dynamic range is yet another meaning, and a fuzzy one to boot. It would take psychoacoustic tests to determine it, and it isn't even clear if it would make much sense to do it, since human perception is not constant and uniform.The TT tool does not measure perception, and if it is trying, it doesn't do a very good job, which is again the point Ian is making. Maybe it would make sense to discuss how it could be improved, but for the moment it seems to me to be a problem with the expectation rather than the implementation.