View Single Post
Old 21st July 2010
Gear Guru

The ASTM, ISO, and other methods are rigorous. They bend over backwards to eliminate individual anomalies from the tests. They have employed all sorts of electronic, acoustic, and statistical minds.
I can's show it here but an actual survey shows variance between Labs of
-37 to +25% in the 125Hz band. Same test, same materials. Real Labs, USA, proper survey.
Ron Sauros work on the edge effect seriously challenges the viability of the standard tests, even in terms of their real goals.
The harbingers of good scientific test are Reproducability and Repeatability. In the same room, same equipment etc., you get or should Repeatability. In neither Labs nor real rooms do you get Reproducability.
The science of sound ain't great yet. In light or other studies those parameters are much better satisfied.
Comparative tests are very believable if they repeat in the same room, as Frank has said. If the comparative result can be reproduced in another room, everything different, I believe then we have a slam dunk, both Harbingers looking good. IMHO this beats the Lab.
This is standard Test philosophy. Not sure it's On Topic here.


Last edited by DanDan; 21st July 2010 at 04:41 PM.. Reason: Typso