The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Ethan Winer on... Condenser Microphones
Old 11th September 2008
  #271
Lives for gear
 
CaptainHook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
Dear Captain Hook.
I read your argument.
Hi, thanks. Although like the first post of the thread asks for,
i still consider this a friendly debate rather than an argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
To me it seems you are asking Ethan to prove nothing.
I don't agree. He said a cheap convertor can record a fuzz guitar
without doing harm. That is something. It's a recording
of a fuzz guitar that in his words doesn't change enough to
think "damn, that doesn't sound as good".

Which is a completely subjective statement on quality.
Ethan and others have questioned this kind of subjective
analysis on the quality of sound, and now that he has made
the same analysis i've called him on it. The reason being
is that he has defended his position that the convertor
sounds as good as a more expensive one based on what
he's heard. He did the same when applying an eq curve
to a mic to match another. He said it sounded identical.
To him.

Yet if someone else says that they DO hear a difference
in the convertors, they get asked to prove it with
scientific data. Or that it's just bias expectation etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
He says there is no significant difference between digital converters when recording
fuzz (distorted guitars)
Mathematically the difference between 35.5% and 35.6% is insignificant.
the 35% distortion coming from a guitar amp and the .1% difference between different converters.
A 0.1% difference in what between convertors?
Distortion? I never said i'm interested in the amount of distortion
a convertor imparts.

Or do you mean there's only a 0.1% difference in the audio
recorded by different convertors? If so, i must admit i'm surprised
if this is technically accurate. Can people really hear a 0.1%
difference? Impressive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
In the real world i also hear no difference between a high end converter and a MOTU converter when recording rock guitar cabinets.
Oh dear.
Does that mean no one can? This isn't evidence
of anything except the way you've experienced certain
events. If i say i HAVE heard a difference, it would mean
just as little, wouldn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
So there it is, mathematically and musically with great ears !
I appreciate you saying you have great ears. Nice touch. Hehe.
I do think your equation isn't relevant though. And it doesn't
take into account if those differences in convertors accumulate
across multiple tracks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
The burden is on you to prove what you claim exists.
What have i claimed here? I've questioned claims from Ethan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
You cant ask Ehan to prove something that he claims doesn't exist.
If he said gravity doesn't exist, do i go jump off a cliff expecting
to float or fly? No, not straight away. I ask for some proof first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Johan View Post
Did you know grammy award winning (for audio engineering) albums have been recorded using cheap Alesis converters ?
Yeah, i'd agree that kind of skill/talent/effort should be rewarded.
But seriously, does Incubus recording an album with 888's mean
it sounded the best it could? Or that the engineer(s) made what
they had work?

A talented artist can create art from the cheapest of tools.
Quality gear makes it easier and faster and (so) often the result
subjectively or not surpasses the work done with cheaper tools.
Not always. But more than not.
Old 11th September 2008
  #272
Gear Maniac
 
RonCarlston's Avatar
 

oh this is getting good now
Old 11th September 2008
  #273
Lives for gear
 
jamwerks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TYY View Post
X2.

While I am a scientist, and a huge skeptic when it comes to 90% of the things that humans experience, Ethan clearly oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.

I respect his stand for objectivity, but although he seems aware of the limitations of science, he doesn't seem so aware of the limitations of his own knowledge of said science.
X3.
Old 11th September 2008
  #274
Lives for gear
 
jamwerks's Avatar
 

Here's another thread where E.W. evokes "scientific evidence".
Old 11th September 2008
  #275
Lives for gear
 
ssaudio's Avatar
 

I could easily write

'I'm a fantastic engineer and scientist who happens to think Ethan is a ****ing genius.'

None of which would bear any relevance nor add any substance to a) what he has written or b) what he hasn't written

This thread has highlighted an astounding degree of ignorance and no less ego.
Old 11th September 2008
  #276
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssaudio View Post
None of which would bear any relevance nor add any substance to a) what he has written or b) what he hasn't written
I would like to know what he did write all I hear is him declaring himself to be the champion of scientific study, but I can't find anything he's written that would support the claim.
Old 11th September 2008
  #277
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by virtualsamana View Post
I think people get threatened when the scientific approach threatens their belief system. In the case of gear, people can spend thousands of dollars chasing the dragon for better sound. Try telling an audiophile that his seven thousand dollars cables are no better than the ones you can buy at Wallmart. I guarantee he will not let his beliefs go so easily. He may believe so much in the magic of that cable that it becomes dogma to him. Often he will rationalize his purchase by 'hearing' a difference in audio quality. Never mind that it can't be duplicated in double blind tests. In those instances the believer may argue the tests are flawed or that science isn't sufficient to explain things he hears like depth, vibe, danceability.
Agreed.

Further to this, the 'belief system' you mention is a symptom of the problem with treating Engineering as 'Art'.

Regarding 'depth', 'vibe' & 'danceability', while these are the traditional 'unmeasureable' attributes of the audiophile, I'd say that we could probably measure all of those.

For example, we could conceivably measure 'depth' as a measure of the spectral content & loudness ratios of the 'attack' signatures within a given time interval, the differences of loudness & spectra being then used as criteria for testing 'depth' as a function of auditory masking.

With regards to 'vibe' & 'danceability', I would expect crest-factor & loudness (via non-linear distortion or SPL) to play the most significant factors.

In any case, while these attributes must be tested subjectively, they must & can be measured within the known domains (time & frequency domain).

For example, if you analyse my samples (below) you will see a measureable relationship in the attack signatures, which is responsible for the perception of depth. This was a design parameter.

To a lesser extent, where tape/tubes/vintage mics/etc provide a perception of depth via 'distortion', this will also be measureable.

Andy
Old 11th September 2008
  #278
Lives for gear
 
imloggedin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamwerks View Post
Here's another thread where E.W. evokes "scientific evidence".
thumbsup that Dan Lavry is a smart man. Great thread.
Old 11th September 2008
  #279
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by perversity View Post
with the Soundblaster Card being noticeably louder, and lots of static in the Apogee track.
That's a bald-faced lie! I just loaded the files into Sound Forge to compare them, and the SB versions are all 0.2 dB softer than the Apogee. Here are the links for all to confirm:

Guitar into SoundBlaster
Guitar into Apogee
Claves into SoundBlaster
Claves into Apogee
Triangle into SoundBlaster
Triangle into Apogee

Also, there is no static on the Apogee versions. There is a very low-level 60 Hz hum - just barely above the acoustic noise floor of the room, and inaudible while the tracks are playing.

I'm all for a discussion of the facts, but outright lies like this are pathetic. Is this really the best you can do?

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #280
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by badboymusic View Post
Captain Hook has brought up some very valid points, how about answering them?
I'm not aware of any outstanding questions. If the hook cares to ask some direct questions, I'll do my best to answer.

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #281
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by TYY View Post
Ethan clearly oversimplifies things to the point of foolishness.
Evidence and examples please!

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #282
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_simpson View Post
With regards to 'vibe' & 'danceability', I would expect crest-factor & loudness (via non-linear distortion or SPL) to play the most significant factors.

In any case, while these attributes must be tested subjectively, they must & can be measured within the known domains (time & frequency domain).
Given that the attributes are subjective, wouldn´t it be enough with only one person disageeing to prove the test wrong?
Old 11th September 2008
  #283
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHook View Post
He said a cheap convertor can record a fuzz guitar without doing harm. That is something. It's a recording of a fuzz guitar that in his words doesn't change enough to think "damn, that doesn't sound as good". Which is a completely subjective statement on quality.
WTF? You asked me to define harm, and that was my answer. Back at you - you define harm please.

Quote:
he has defended his position that the convertor sounds as good as a more expensive one based on what he's heard. He did the same when applying an eq curve to a mic to match another. He said it sounded identical. To him.
Talk about lose-lose...

When I cite measured response, distortion, and noise the anti-science faction calls me a meter reader and says "Just use your ears." But when I cite impressions of what I hear you complain I'm using subjective criteria which is not precise enough.

WTF?

WTF?!


Quote:
Yet if someone else says that they DO hear a difference in the convertors, they get asked to prove it with scientific data. Or that it's just bias expectation etc.
This brings up an interesting point. A few years ago I saw a TV documentary about the reliability of eye witnesses to crimes. The show's producers staged a crime in a room with a bunch of people. They had a guy walk in, then suddenly grab a woman's purse and run out of the room. Then they interviewed everyone in the room asking for a description of the perp. Everyone had a different description, and many/most were totally wrong! These people were absolutely certain of what they saw with their own eyes only minutes earlier! But most were very wrong.

The exact same thing happens when people are certain they heard an Apogee sound better than an SB Live or whatever other cheap sound card. This is why the meter readers read meters.

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #284
Gear Head
 
perversity's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
That's a bald-faced lie! I just loaded the files into Sound Forge to compare them, and the SB versions are all 0.2 dB softer than the Apogee. Here are the links for all to confirm:

Also, there is no static on the Apogee versions. There is a very low-level 60 Hz hum - just barely above the acoustic noise floor of the room, and inaudible while the tracks are playing.

I'm all for a discussion of the facts, but outright lies like this are pathetic. Is this really the best you can do?

--Ethan
Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that the original files were as you say, with the Apogee being louder, and I really couldn't hear the hum, which you claim is inaudible. Your testing was biased based on the fact that one source is louder and the other contains interference, which I CAN HEAR by the way. I can't even begin to imagine how you defend your views under the veil of science.
Old 11th September 2008
  #285
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sounds Great View Post
These are totally different distortions at different places in the recording chain. You can't add them and compare the totals.
All of the THD and noise and other artifacts in a single piece of gear are routinely added to derive a single THD+N spec. So why can that not be applied to multiple devices in a system?

Also, it would be nice it you'd concede you were totally wrong about proximity effect being influenced by SPL level. Thanks.

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #286
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by perversity View Post
Let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that the original files were as you say, with the Apogee being louder
For the sake of discussion? The files are indeed as I say and I posted a link for everyone to verify. You should apologize to the entire Gearslutz community for throwing a bald-faced lie into the middle of a technical discussion. Sheesh!

Quote:
Your testing was biased based on the fact that one source is louder and the other contains interference, which I CAN HEAR by the way.
It's obvious this is pointless, so here is my last attempt at being reasonable with someone who doesn't even pretend to be reasonable:

As explained in the original thread at Lynn Fuston's site, we set the levels as closely as possible to avoid level matching later which could affect the files. Different VU meters respond differently, and the 0.2 dB difference is the best we could manage without spending hours on just that. And I never said the hum was inaudible.

First you lie, then you misrepresent what I claimed, then you lie some more. Unbelievable. Have you no shame?

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #287
Lives for gear
 
ssaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I would like to know what he did write all I hear is him declaring himself to be the champion of scientific study, but I can't find anything he's written that would support the claim.
You exemplify my point beautifully, thank you.
Old 11th September 2008
  #288
Lives for gear
 
imloggedin's Avatar
 

wonder when a mod will close this thread. its just become an ethan bashing.
Old 11th September 2008
  #289
Lives for gear
 

Not only is the Apogee file 0.2 db louder, the polarity of the SoundBlaster file is also reversed. Absolute polarity matters, it can be heard, increasingly so with more asymmetrical waveforms. This has also been confirmed in studies (which, I'm afraid, I cannot remember where I sourced them).

Anyway, after adjusting level and polarity the Apogee file still sounds better. This is quite audible on the acoustic guitar, where the fine details on the strings in the high end and the fast attacks are much better represented, the SB has more of a washed-out sound. Now if you were to process these files afterwards in a DAW, and send them through the converters again for outboard processing, these effects accumulate in a manner that makes them very obvious in the end product even on low end systems.
Old 11th September 2008
  #290
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
wonder when a mod will close this thread. its just become and ethan bashing.
What do you mean, "become"? That's exactly what it started off as.
Old 11th September 2008
  #291
What is this, politics of personal destruction? A grand game of "gotcha"?

And some of you wonder why many talented pros have left this forum, some of you have made it a very smelly place. Sad.

PS, Ethan, don't feed the trolls, you can never convince them.
We appreciate your contrubutions, even if some don't.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Old 11th September 2008
  #292
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by imloggedin View Post
its just become an ethan bashing.
This may surprise you but I don't see it quite that way. Yes, there are a number of people who have nothing of substance and just toss insults. It's easy to identify and ignore them. (Or pity them.) In the larger picture, this is an excellent resource for those who really do want the truth. People can read the opinions of both sides - those who promote a scientific understanding and those who view science as the enemy. At least that's how I see the division.

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #293
Lives for gear
 
imloggedin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
This may surprise you but I don't see it quite that way. Yes, there are a number of people who have nothing of substance and just toss insults. It's easy to identify and ignore them. (Or pity them.)
Yet you seem like a mild man and you are saying "WTF!?????"
Old 11th September 2008
  #294
Gear Head
 
perversity's Avatar
 

Maybe Ethan could just sue us, and put a cease and desist order on this topic.
Old 11th September 2008
  #295
Lives for gear
 
Weasel9992's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by perversity View Post
Maybe Ethan could just sue us, and put a cease and desist order on this topic.
Again, nothing but a childish low-blow. If you have something intelligent to add, please do so. If not, then read along like the rest of us. If you'd like to personally attack Ethan, start another thread and see how long it lasts.

Frank
Old 11th September 2008
  #296
Gear Head
 
perversity's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post
Also, there is no static on the Apogee versions. There is a very low-level 60 Hz hum - just barely above the acoustic noise floor of the room, and inaudible while the tracks are playing.

--Ethan
Yes, you did say that the hum is inaudible. It's funny how you forget what you YOURSELF posts, then cry fowl, and call me a liar. Everyone of your cheerleaders here might ignore it, but your double talking strips away any credibility you may have left for anyone that can think for themselves. Why not just post your opinions as what they are, opinions.
Old 11th September 2008
  #297
Gear Head
 
perversity's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weasel9992 View Post
Again, nothing but a childish low-blow. If you have something intelligent to add, please do so. If not, then read along like the rest of us. If you'd like to personally attack Ethan, start another thread and see how long it lasts.

Frank
Wow, it's the revenge of the gearpimps! It's funny that it's okay for Ethan to call me a liar, for you cheerleading salespeople to call me childish, and then try to chastise me for attacking Ethan. If I get canned from this site, so-be-it, I really don't care. Seems to me that this site is for you gearpimping mf's to try to pitch your bs products to us end-users. I think it's about time one of you got flamed for all the bogus misinformation you promote.fuuck
Old 11th September 2008
  #298
Lives for gear
 
Ben B's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by perversity View Post
Yes, you did say that the hum is inaudible. It's funny how you forget what you YOURSELF posts, then cry fowl, and call me a liar. Everyone of your cheerleaders here might ignore it, but your double talking strips away any credibility you may have left for anyone that can think for themselves. Why not just post your opinions as what they are, opinions.
I haven't listened to the files, but are you saying you can hear the hum while the tracks are playing, or that you can hear the hum when they are not playing?

Ethan only claimed that it is inaudible when they are playing.

-Ben B
Old 11th September 2008
  #299
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Williams View Post
Ethan, don't feed the trolls, you can never convince them. We appreciate your contrubutions, even if some don't.
Thanks Jim, and I'm aware nobody can convert angry believers. I do ignore the obvious insult posts, though if I don't reply they accuse me of ducking their questions. As I said before, it's lose-lose trying to debate with losers.

--Ethan
Old 11th September 2008
  #300
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben B View Post
Ethan only claimed that it is inaudible when they are playing.
Right, though perhaps I should have said mostly inaudible because it depends on how loudly you play the tracks, and how well your room and loudspeakers can reproduce low hum frequencies. But trying to have a reasonable discussion with an anonymous nobody who gives me and Frank the finger is pointless. Plonk.

Anonymity seems to bring out the worst in people.

--Ethan
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
burke111 / The Good News Channel
4
dannygold / Bass traps, acoustic panels, foam etc
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump