佩服
thxman wrote:
Harman MLL...(恕刪)
From：
http://www.myav.com.tw/bbs/showthread.php?s=d47d8a9354ff6d9bf591cbbf2b348720&threadid=20480278&postid=205751565#post205751565
Trained Listening - Dr. Sean Olive from Harman International
2'50" 為何使用trained listeners, 因為比一般消費者的表現更具鑑別度且結果一致.
5' Training 的目的不是增進欣賞音樂內容能力, 而是提高對音響各類失真的鑑別度.
7'30" "Trained musicians"未必是良好的受試者. 因為未經訓練前他們傾向於被內容帶著走而未能將注意力集中在鑑別音質差異上.
經過Training, 在測試過程中"Music becomes pink noise"
10' "How to Listen"軟體 in Harman
10'45" 測試時軟體的選擇, 須要能顯露spectral problems(頻寬, 種類..要夠多樣)
"Tracy Chapman 的 Fast Car" is second best to pink noise (笑)
12'40" Q: Harman listening room , Blind vs Sighted
13'20" A: 盲測避免bias and placebo effect
15'50" 以品酒類比
16'30" "How to Listen" 自我訓練大約時程?
粗估約每天半小時, 1-2個月應小有所成 ("level 8", minimal accepted for sound quality evaluation )
18'15" Q: 擁有金耳朵是否表示有更好的鑑別度?
A: ..世上有太多的"self-proclaimed golden ears", 實際表現並沒有比一般人好到那裡去
18'50" Q: 盲人或視力受損者是否表現更佳?
A: 雖未能普遍調查, 遇過的少數例子並非如此.
20' Q: 近年的room correction 軟體是否提供更好的鑑別判斷
A: 做過比較, 請參考: The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products
26" 喇叭規格的討論
32'30" Harmonic distortion不算是很好的音質評估工具.. 與聽感喜好關聯度不足.
38'20" 年輕人即使使用mp3等大量壓縮音源實驗顯示其實仍喜歡更佳音質的高解析檔案.
=================================================================================================
From：
http://www.myav.com.tw/bbs/showthread.php?s=d47d8a9354ff6d9bf591cbbf2b348720&threadid=20480278&postid=205751854#post205751854
聽覺的記憶短暫, 也牽涉到音響心理學, 可依據良好的實驗設計去做控制的.
Yamaha網頁的資訊寫得很不錯: Quality assessment methods
http://www.yamahaproaudio.com/europ...istening_tests/
有空參考看看
To achieve a relevant quality assessment about the audio quality and sound quality of an audio system, we propose the following conditions to be met for valid listening tests:
1) Tests must be controlled: all factors other than the audio system must be either removed or kept constant:
* sound source (live musicians can not be used)
* acoustic environment
* listening position & angle
* visible environment
* temperature and humidity
* smell and taste
2) at least two listening sessions must be performed per listening test to allow differential analysis.
* A single session referencing to memory is not valid.
3) tests must be blind
* The test subjects must not know to what reference they are listening to
4) audio materials must be shorter than 20 seconds
5) If different signal chains are used, their total gain must be calibrated within 0.5 dB
理性與感性、科學與藝術
http://blog.xuite.net/thxisf/twblog
ldw406 wrote:
請問audio quality 和 sound quality 有何不同？
以下供參：
ken wu兄分享此圖係出於Yamaha Commercial Audio white paper《Audio quality in networked systems》9.2節中。
在Yamaha Commercial Audio white paper《Audio quality in networked systems》中對於其所提之 audio、sound、audio quality、sound quality 之闡述在第一章。
1.1 Audio
1.2 Sound
1.4 Quality
1.5 Audio quality
1.6 Sound quality
網兄可逕行閱讀。
Ex.
理性與感性、科學與藝術
http://blog.xuite.net/thxisf/twblog
內文搜尋
從 APP 打開
X