Popular Post John Dyson Posted November 24, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 24, 2020 23 minutes ago, botrytis said: I think Harley likes to pick at nits..... He doesn't take into account that our perceptions interfere with us OBJECTIVELY listening. There are a few things that the human senses can discern more than than measurements (blue light is one) but hearing? As you get older, your hearing degrades and this is a fact. Your hearing range also degrades. I have experienced a paradoxical effect where temporary hearing damage sometimes reveals signal impairments that I hadn't otherwise noticed. When the damage subsides, I try to take advantage of what I have learned during the damage to try to still perceive the impairments, with limited benefit. I would guess that it might partially be related to frequency selectivity or something like that. The rest of this message is not intended as a direct response to the previous poster, but instead is intended as a general hard-earned word to the wise. Trying to depend on subjective measurements can be hell -- from true kindness, I try to strongly discourage people from depending on methods that have so much variability. This suggestion is NOT a matter of religion, it comes from experience. This experience has taught me a LOT about the frailties of human perception, but ALSO human hearing's ability to discern certain signal characteristics and impairments can be AMAZING. I am open to the subjective, but only as a secondary or last ditch method. First, try the 'meter'. Second, try the 'meter'. If simple measurement fails, add some signal processing, then 'try the meter' on the processed signal. If all else fails, fall back on combo subjective/objective, pray and be very careful -- maybe using signal processing to help discern signal characteristics. Being able to use the 'meter' (or processed signal and meter) can save lots of tweaking, tuning, and complicated/error prone testing. As always, a layer of smart statistics and experimental control can help mitigate measurement errors. Process/method is VERY important also. I have wasted TOO MUCH time when trying ad-hoc methods. The true 'short cut' is often the more rigorous methodology. John blue2 and pkane2001 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now