Skip to main content
Topic: Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary? (Read 26315 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #225
[ No, Kruger logic dictates this must be all personal, ya understand. Somehow, "treatments" threaten my speaker sales, Franks I don't know what sales and Genes..hmm, one would think he could profit nicely off iso-ward product sales to his minions with their high markups, so dunno there either.
Or maybe we're all just members of the interior decor fashion secret police.
Whatever it is, we know it can't be about perceptual claims of "improvement" with treatments.

You mad bro?


I'm a little unhappy that you feel the need to continually claim falsely about my position in this  matter.  What's the problem, AJ?  Not selling enough speakers because people want to treat their rooms first?

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #226
It's still not very clear what a studiophile is, but I have the feeling that I qualify

Kees,

The thread title and OP has been revised to make it quite clear what this is about. If you agree with this then you are a studiophile.
The issue is  Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary? We're looking for valid perceptual evidence, os no, what clients expect, etc. is not relevant.
Please keep in mind that studiophiles also believe home listening environments should be similar or the same as studios as well.
As I have stated many times on different forums, I'm not against studiophiles having as much treatments as possible, any more than I'm against audiophiles buying bling to make themselves happier. I made my position clear by the 4th post in the thread. The believers cranked up immediately following, but still no evidence.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #227
I think it's nearly impossible to do a proper DBT when it comes to changes in the acoustics of rooms and halls, since fast switching is impossible.


Since TOS#8 only requires evidence "to the best of their ability", new HA readers should be surprised to see how one can spam down this thread with repeated abuse of the TOS item and remain unmoderated. (Old HA readers know already that the TOS are subject to whoever has the power to bend and wield them.)
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #228
Is this why you're so worked up, AJ?

Have you stopped beating your wife Mr Sullivan?

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-audio-the...than-winer.html

Is that thread started on 11/13, the reason this one was started the same day, based on threads from 11/8 and 11/12?
Dunno, maybe Greynol is a seer too?

Regardless, it appears there are at least 2 other haters with a clear agenda, Fbov (Frank, physicist I believe) and Gene...well, no intro needed.
Remember, it can't be the actual issue of treatments and perceptual claims made like in the Winer article. No, Kruger logic dictates this must be all personal, ya understand. Somehow, "treatments" threaten my speaker sales, Franks I don't know what sales and Genes..hmm, one would think he could profit nicely off iso-ward product sales to his minions with their high markups, so dunno there either.
Or maybe we're all just members of the interior decor fashion secret police.
Whatever it is, we know it can't be about perceptual claims of "improvement" with treatments.

You mad bro?



My  first link was a recent example of someone endorsing Winer's  views on early reflections.  My  second link was direct to Winer's views.

So those are *not* the sort of things that u mad about bro?

I'm on there too now, though my beef is more with people writing stuff about Toole apparently without having read what he wrote.

A pissing match with Arny here seems beside the point.

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #229
My  first link was a recent example of someone endorsing Winer's  views on early reflections.  My  second link was direct to Winer's views.
So those are *not* the sort of things that u mad about bro?

I don't get mad, I get even. Actually, most of my time on forums is spent laughing at the D-Krugers, not "getting mad". The vast majority of folks that post on audio forums are believers of one sort or the other. The number that can comprehend what Toole, Olive, Griesinger, JJ, Salmi et al are doing, are infinitesimally small.


I'm on there too now, though my beef is more with people writing stuff about Toole apparently without having read what he wrote.

He enrages audiophiles and studiophiles equally, because they are cut from the same sighted belief/immune to bias cloth. As Winer and Raging Bull here demonstrate.
Of course I was unaware Floyd doesn't play any musical instruments, so we at least gained that vital piece of information. Oh and Ethan drives a Honda.

cheers,

AJ
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #230
I think it's nearly impossible to do a proper DBT when it comes to changes in the acoustics of rooms and halls, since fast switching is impossible.

I disagree, since this is not a JND, no one except the incessant Krugers, is claiming no difference.
I think its entirely possible to test perceptual differences/preferences that require settling time/adaptation.
Those who peddle treatments etc. and make specious claims about them, will still be subject to scientific rigor, despite their desire to trump this via "authority" and "experience".
The onus will always be on them to supply the proof, not just frantically wave hands and sob when challenged by real rationalists.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #231
Mr. AJ, I don't mean to change the subject here on this thread, but I couldn't help but notice that you've got some great looking speakers on your website.

Wait a minute...are those 'audiophile' amps I see in the background? What's up with that?
Ad hominem attacks are not Science.

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #232
I don't get mad, I get even.


IOW you must go from forum to forum, ruining the resdual credibility one gets for simply being there.

Quote
Actually, most of my time on forums is spent laughing at the D-Krugers, not "getting mad".


That's ironic.

Going onto forums to laugh at people is more than  a little pathological all by itself.  Normal behavior is more like participating in forums to have pleasant and helpful interactions with people with the same interests.  For me the ratio between what I learn and what I share is very still heavy on the learning side.

AJ, have you yet figured out that your many false claims qualify you as one who is having an ongoing acute attack of Dunning-Kruger syndrome? 

When will it end?

Quote
The vast majority of folks that post on audio forums are believers of one sort or the other.


That's a truism, even if you take out the word audio.

Quote
The number that can comprehend what Toole, Olive, Griesinger, JJ, Salmi et al are doing, are infinitesimally small.


AJ, please feel free to exclude yourself from that group. Your ignorant comments here which includes many misapprehensions about  the writings of Toole and Olive and is all the evidence that is needed.

 

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #233
Since TOS#8 only requires evidence "to the best of their ability", new HA readers should be surprised to see how one can spam down this thread with repeated abuse of the TOS item and remain unmoderated. (Old HA readers know already that the TOS are subject to whoever has the power to bend and wield them.)

And it has also been said repeatedly by the community (not just by the moderators!) that if you aren't able to provide evidence then STFU.

Are we done trolling from the peanut gallery yet, Porcus?
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #234
Since TOS#8 only requires evidence "to the best of their ability", new HA readers should be surprised to see how one can spam down this thread with repeated abuse of the TOS item and remain unmoderated. (Old HA readers know already that the TOS are subject to whoever has the power to bend and wield them.)

And it has also been said repeatedly by the community (not just by the moderators!) that if you aren't able to provide evidence then STFU.


My associates and I've repeatedly (most recently about a month ago) have tried to do sensitive ABX tests involving acoustical influences (speakers and rooms for example) and been met with nothing but frustration.

There seem to be physical reasons why this won't change soon. ABX is basically too sensitive to not return positives just about all the time, some of which will be for the purposes of most experiments, false.

So what of the DBT's of speakers by Harman?

A big chunk of a test is the question asked, and the questions that Harman appear to be asking do not seem to relate to just hearing differences.  They seem to be more like questions about people's opinions. That's a whole 'nuther thing.  One biggie - the concept of a reliable standard flew out the door.

We all know that the costs of setting up these DBTs involving acoustical influences required some very expensive and large custom-built hardware. That puts them in the difficult to impossible category in my book.

Therefore. I'm of the opinion that people who want to repeatedly demand DBT evidence related to tests involving acoustical influences should be moderated until they STFU once they are made aware of the situation.

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #235
Going onto forums to laugh at people is more than  a little pathological all by itself.  Normal behavior is more like participating in forums to have pleasant and helpful interactions with people with the same interests.

I'm pleasant and helpful with those who are here/there to actually learn something, or actually know something, which automatically excludes the Krugers who are believers incapable of learning and already "know" about treatments et al.
Why shouldn't I enjoy their sighted believer beliefs, "authority" and incessant, inconsolable sobbing when challenged? It's very funny! 
Of course, as much as you'ld like it to be Amir, the thread isn't about me, but about Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?
Which makes your responses even funnier. 

For me the ratio between what I learn and what I share is very still heavy on the learning side.

So sayeth raging bull. See that was very funny 
You can't be cognizant of this, but we are now at page 10(!!) of your frantic hand waving, dancing, crying...and still, ZERO EVIDENCE.
It would be interesting to search the number of posts you made that had zero reference to the thread topic of treatments viability Amir, excuse me, Arny.

nominal changes to room acoustics are readily audible and measurable and can be effectively and reliably managed by trained people based on sighted evaluations.

The first problem is that a lot if not most of the evidence that Toole relies on was not developed using DBTs.

Your ignorant comments here which includes many misapprehensions about  the writings of Toole and Olive and is all the evidence that is needed.

Perfect, bravo Mr Kruger. 

it has audible effects and if you manage them well they can improve SQ.

Page 10. Here's you big chance.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #236
My associates and I've repeatedly (most recently about a month ago) have tried to do sensitive ABX tests involving acoustical influences (speakers and rooms for example) and been met with nothing but frustration.

Shocking. You really should leave that sort of thing to real experts like Toole and Olive et al. You know, non-studiophiles who understand why tests/evaluations should be controlled/blind, not sighted.
It's not like you were going to publish anything with AES like they do anyway, assuming your claim isn't completely fabricated of course, which is yet another trait....
That's just too bad Arny. So you admit you still have zero evidence in support of the thread title, 10 pages in.

Therefore. I'm of the opinion that people who want to repeatedly demand DBT evidence related to tests involving acoustical influences should be moderated until they STFU once they are made aware of the situation.

Here? On HA?
Wonderland is calling Alice, they need you back! 
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #237
My associates and I've repeatedly (most recently about a month ago) have tried to do sensitive ABX tests involving acoustical influences (speakers and rooms for example) and been met with nothing but frustration.

Shocking. You really should leave that sort of thing to real experts like Toole and Olive et al.


Thanks for the opportunity to point out that Toole and Olive learned about audio ABX from my associates and I.  You know this very well, so we also get to add this to your long list of intentional false claims.

Quote
You know, non-studiophiles who understand why tests/evaluations should be controlled/blind, not sighted. \


As opposed to trolls who don't know the difference between informal listening tests and formal blind tests such as yourself, AJ?

Quote
It's not like you were going to publish anything with AES like they do anyway, assuming your claim isn't completely fabricated of course, which is yet another trait....


There you go again AJ - calling names  like a 9 year old and casting false aspersions.  You seem to know nothing about the tests I am referring to even though I posted  links to videos about them here a few days back.

For example do you know the name of the AES Fellow who supervised that work?

Quote
That's just too bad Arny. So you admit you still have zero evidence in support of the thread title, 10 pages in.


Not only do I have zero evidence, but I presently have zero evidence in developing any, and you've been told this many times in this thread, AJ.  Basic reading comprehension problems, anybody?


Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #238
I posted  links to videos about them here a few days back.

In this thread? Completely missed. Link?

For example do you know the name of the AES Fellow who supervised that work?.

Why don't you drop a name, see if we can establish some guilt by association?

Thanks for the opportunity to point out that Toole and Olive learned about audio ABX from my associates and I.

Chris Rock's got nothing on you man. Seriously. Then you wonder why I can't stop laughing???

such as yourself, AJ?

There you go again AJ

You seem to know nothing

Not only do I have zero evidence, but I presently have zero evidence in developing any.

That's a nice summary after 10 pages, thanks.


Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #239
Since TOS#8 only requires evidence "to the best of their ability", new HA readers should be surprised to see how one can spam down this thread with repeated abuse of the TOS item and remain unmoderated. (Old HA readers know already that the TOS are subject to whoever has the power to bend and wield them.)

And it has also been said repeatedly by the community (not just by the moderators!) that if you aren't able to provide evidence then STFU.


"on behalf of infinitely many". Impressed. Well, maybe you are right, and that none in the HA community sees any credibility whatsoever in the claims that concert X sounded incredibly shitty when an amp broke down, unless there are bootlegs available.
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #240
I posted  links to videos about them here a few days back.

In this thread? Completely missed. Link?

Arny, AJ and I have all been caught by mixing up this thread with other related (and cited) threads. Arny posted links here. And I'm guessing the name he would therefore drop is David Clark.

…I did not write the whole 9 pages. Just guessing, but its possible that a guy named AJ is responsible for more of those 9 pages than I.

LOL Well let’s have a quick count:
Member:____ Posts:__My comment:
greynol______36_____Thread starter, moderator, lots of content and… ? You decide.
ajinfla_______83_____You decide. Certainly post#4 was a relevant opinion, but … over 3 pages, just from AJ. How many contributed?
Arny________49_____Mixed… You decide. … nearly 2 pages
bobbaker(me)19(now)_Mixed…
Member X____20_____This member, IMO had the largest number of relevant, thoughtful posts.
Member Y_____9 _____This member also seemed to stick to the topic, plus some extra comments.

Then there are 2 members with 4 comments, 4 members with 2 comments, and 9 members with 1 comment.

I'm pleasant and helpful with those who are here/there to actually learn something, or actually know something,

AJ, please don’t contradict this fact: I’m here/there to learn and I know some relevant stuff. Please don’t label me “believer” (in what?) and be a jerk to me, as you have been. Should we start being “pleasant and helpful”?
For example
I think it's nearly impossible to do a proper DBT when it comes to changes in the acoustics of rooms and halls, since fast switching is impossible.

I disagree, since this is not a JND, …, is claiming no difference.
I think its entirely possible to test perceptual differences/preferences that require settling time/adaptation.

First, if you can create an independent variable (absorption, or dB-reflection-reduction, or…), you can create a dependent variable of JND… but that’s not relevant for this thread.
I agree that the switching time need not be super-fast. I would argue it depends on the level of processing, from sensory to perceptual to cognitive, of the sound. What do you mean by “require settling time/adaptation”?

Hoping for “pleasant and helpful”, but I’m not holding my breath…

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #241
Well, maybe you are right, and that none in the HA community sees any credibility whatsoever in the claims that concert X sounded incredibly shitty when an amp broke down

You can't be cognizant of this, but that's pure Red Herring. Try the AES archives instead of 10 pages of sobbing and foot stomping. That's your best hope.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #242
10 pages of sobbing and foot stomping.


AFAICT you have posted significantly less than ten pages in this thread ... yet.


There is what we scientists call a "testable empirical consequence" of these claims - though I hope scientists have better things to do than to register a HA account to use this community as lab rats for something this stupid:
Suppose a user posts "I just relocated to Portland, and I got a giant boomy bass peak in my new living room. Any hints? Seems like everything is concrete here, my old house outside Helsinki was wood ... does that matter?"
Test: Will the HA community (and not just the moderators!) go "TOS#8! Go back to Helsinki and DBT it against your old room or S-T-F-U!"?
User: "Look, I actually measured the peak to +27 dB @110 Hz ... "
Test: Will the HA community go "Measurement? Invalid as per TOS#8! STFU until you have posted a DBT log!"? Would any of the mods issue warnings?
Of course the latter depends only on one person, not on the community, and so is a fairly weak indicator for community jerk factor.
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #243
Arny posted links here. And I'm guessing the name he would therefore drop is David Clark.

Wow, that almost put me in a coma and I certainly wouldn't want to be guilty by association there, with that hot mess of a "test"....if you can call it that.
Probably deserves a thread all by itself.  Oh...and zero relevance to this thread topic.

AJ, please don’t contradict this fact: I’m here/there to learn and I know some relevant stuff.

Fantastic news Bob, so let's see what you know about Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?
The relevant stuff? (Hint: "relevant stuff" does not include the words "AJ" anywhere. Try the AES library instead)

Please don’t label me “believer” (in what?)

Riiight Bob.  Ok, litmus test: Early Reflections Are Not Beneficial.
Believer utter nonsense/ad hominem, etc., or....?

I agree that the switching time need not be super-fast. I would argue it depends on the level of processing, from sensory to perceptual to cognitive, of the sound.

Great!
Happy Thanksgiving.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #244
There is what we scientists call a "testable empirical consequence" of these claims - though I hope scientists have better things to do than to register a HA account to use this community as lab rats for something this stupid:
Suppose a user posts "I just relocated to Portland, and I got a giant boomy bass peak in my new living room. Any hints? Seems like everything is concrete here, my old house outside Helsinki was wood ... does that matter?"
Test: Will the HA community (and not just the moderators!) go "TOS#8! Go back to Helsinki and DBT it against your old room or S-T-F-U!"?
User: "Look, I actually measured the peak to +27 dB @110 Hz ... "
Test: Will the HA community go "Measurement? Invalid as per TOS#8! STFU until you have posted a DBT log!"? Would any of the mods issue warnings?
Of course the latter depends only on one person, not on the community, and so is a fairly weak indicator for community jerk factor.

Oh look, more foot stomping and chucking toys from pram, zero reliable evidence for Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?
A "scientist" who doesn't know what a red herring is, or the word "difference". Cool 
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #245
AJ, please don’t contradict this fact: I’m here/there to learn and I know some relevant stuff.

Fantastic news Bob, so let's see what you know about Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?
The relevant stuff? (Hint: "relevant stuff" does not include the words "AJ" anywhere. Try the AES library instead)

Where is your "relevant stuff”? Hint: it doesn’t include “Bob”, “Arny”, “Amir”, “keny”, “studiophile”, “placebophile” or your favorite: a list of gerunds.

Please don’t label me “believer” (in what?)

Riiight Bob.  Ok, litmus test: Early Reflections Are Not Beneficial.

Clearly, in your world all is blue or pink, base or acid, us or them…
But the real world doesn’t fit your simplistic 2-valued categorizations. FYI, I already said I’m agnostic on Winer’s claims.


When will you contribute more than irrelevant challenges to relevance and page counts?
I agree that the switching time need not be super-fast. I would argue it depends on the level of processing, from sensory to perceptual to cognitive, of the sound.  What do you mean by “require settling time/adaptation”?

Great!
Happy Thanksgiving.
Thanks, and Happy Thanksgiving to you! So, what do you mean by “require settling time/adaptation”?

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #246
You can't be cognizant of this, but we are now at page 10(!!) of your frantic hand waving, dancing, crying...and still, ZERO EVIDENCE.
It would be interesting to search the number of posts you made that had zero reference to the thread topic of treatments viability Amir, excuse me, Arny.


An independent study shows that a guy posting under the nym AJ has made about twice as many posts to this thread as I.  Thus, it is clear AJ that your awareness of all of your personal attacks, name calling,  frantic hand waving, dancing, crying...and still, ZERO RELEVANT EVIDENCE is nil.  No self-awareness!

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #247
There won't be any relevant stuff posted here and I still don't get all the fuss.

Changing your room can cause big differences in how sound travels through the room and eventually arrives at your ears. That is demonstrable, measurable. Even just simplistic frequency response measurements can show big differences.
If you don't hear a difference between a relatively empty room with hard surfaces vs. one filled with absorbers and diffusors then you're deaf.

Getting used to a room does not negate that these differences are detectable in an ABX test in principle. Heck, when switching to headphones with very different FR you can also get used to it...

So we have measurable, audible differences.


The next question is what you use the room for. Monitoring, recording, multichannel home cinema ... ? From there we can look at different recommendations e.g. regarding RT60 and finally preferences.

If somebody doesn't like early reflections or likes bass-heavy headphones then so be it. You cannot tell people what they have to like.
"I hear it when I see it."

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #248
10 pages of sobbing and foot stomping.


AFAICT you have posted significantly less than ten pages in this thread ... yet.


There is what we scientists call a "testable empirical consequence" of these claims - though I hope scientists have better things to do than to register a HA account to use this community as lab rats for something this stupid:
Suppose a user posts "I just relocated to Portland, and I got a giant boomy bass peak in my new living room. Any hints? Seems like everything is concrete here, my old house outside Helsinki was wood ... does that matter?"
Test: Will the HA community (and not just the moderators!) go "TOS#8! Go back to Helsinki and DBT it against your old room or S-T-F-U!"?
User: "Look, I actually measured the peak to +27 dB @110 Hz ... "
Test: Will the HA community go "Measurement? Invalid as per TOS#8! STFU until you have posted a DBT log!"? Would any of the mods issue warnings?
Of course the latter depends only on one person, not on the community, and so is a fairly weak indicator for community jerk factor.


It is kind of ironic that we invented ABX to deal with people who were reporting audible differences due to distortion with lots of leading zeroes, and now up to 100% or more distortion is being dismissed based on a lack of confining ABX testing.

Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary?

Reply #249
There won't be any relevant stuff posted here and I still don't get all the fuss.

That is not relevant! 
Changing your room can cause big differences in how sound travels through the room and eventually arrives at your ears. That is demonstrable, measurable. Even just simplistic frequency response measurements can show big differences.
If you don't hear a difference between a relatively empty room with hard surfaces vs. one filled with absorbers and diffusors then you're deaf.

Getting used to a room does not negate that these differences are detectable in an ABX test in principle. Heck, when switching to headphones with very different FR you can also get used to it...

So we have measurable, audible differences.


The next question is what you use the room for. Monitoring, recording, multichannel home cinema ... ? From there we can look at different recommendations e.g. regarding RT60 and finally preferences.

If somebody doesn't like early reflections or likes bass-heavy headphones then so be it. You cannot tell people what they have to like.

Although this is not a relevant DBT of Bass Traps and Other Treatments, it is a relevant answer to Bass Traps and Other Treatments: Why so frequently assumed necessary? ... to everyone except those who blather about relevance, without saying anything relevant!! I'm blathering...
Happy Thanksgiving to those in the US and to expats like me!

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020