16 Jul
2010
16 Jul
'10
12:19 p.m.
On Friday 16 July 2010 12:06:02 Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 11:46 +0200, Arnold Krille
wrote:
Does it sound bad because of taste or because of something quantifiable?
If the later, your tests are insufficient and you have to extend it. Simple as
that. (Thats why scientists always want more money for devices:)
If the first, you have to a) define good taste and b) if you want to measure it,
you have to do blind-tests or even double blind-tests. And use a test-group as
large as possible.
Arnold
On Friday 16 July 2010 09:50:39 Ralf Mardorf
wrote:
Your bad!
On my computer the measurements are ok, but the audible results are bad. On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 09:56 +0200, Arnold Krille
wrote:
Apples and oranges.
You are working on midi-latency-jitter. Which is measurable. And the test
is when the jitter becomes unbearable.
Taste on the other thing is not measurable and while you could quantify
it, common sense says that taste-minorities are valuable too... You really should do that test first before
speculating about the
outcome and your audience.
Btw. I tested my own music.
First I played inside songs from other people a Ralf-mastering of my
own music.
Most people didn't like my song.
Some weeks later I played the same song inside other songs from other
people by a loudness-war-mastering.
Most people liked the song.
Playing the same song two times can't be called heavy rotation, hence
they were not accustomed to my song, but they need a bad mastering to
be fine with this song.
A blind study is useless regarding to musical issues.