The Woeful Inadequacies of Acoustical Testing
Our article, Testing 1, 2 – Is This On?, was just featured on ProSoundWeb.
It’s a truism in standards-testing industries: you can only test for parameters for which you have tests.
In the acoustics business that means testing is limited to measurement values which have accurate and repeatable tests, like sound pressure.
Read the rest of this article at ProSoundWeb.
About author
Related posts
In a post-pandemic world, our lives look a little different than they used to. Since so many of us worked from home over the past... Continue reading
Music production used to be the domain of the rich and influential. If you and your band wanted to produce a demo, you’d need to... Continue reading
Our cinema room is our favorite room in the house – we love it! The acoustic panels allow us to enjoy pitch-perfect surround sound. The... Continue reading
Company’s acoustic products provide sound control throughout facility PITTSBURGH, NOVEMBER XX, 2017 – The Church Recording Studio, located in a former Presbyterian Church, hosts regional... Continue reading
One comment on “The Woeful Inadequacies of Acoustical Testing”
Chris
I will never argue that your ears are your best tool for deciding whether or not something sounds good.
Though, I will argue that through measurement, it is very possible to get an accurate display of what is happening in terms of the effect reverberation has on the resultant sound of a system. Most measurement platforms offer some form of polar or complex magnitude averaging. With polar averaging, reverberation (late arriving but corollary signal) is given some weight in the resultant magnitude display. As opposed to complex averaging, which much more aggressively averages out the effects of reverberation. Of course, what something sounds like to me, does not sound the same to you as we have different sets of ears and different opinions about what is even good. At least we can both perform repeatable measurements that we can than make empirical decisions on.