Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool2.mu.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!info-high-audio-request From: mark@mips.COM (Mark G. Johnson) Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end Subject: Deliberately designed to measure great AND sound rotten Message-ID: <8399@uwm.edu> Date: 17 Dec 90 14:01:28 GMT Sender: news@uwm.edu Lines: 33 Approved: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu A long while back I remember reading an article that said (roughly) the following. Just because measurements on a piece of equipment show low Total Harmonic Distortion or low IM distortion or flat frequency response within +/- 0.05 dB, doesn't guarantee it will sound good. A stunning demonstration and Proof of this hypothesis was presented by Mr. xxxx [ don't remember name ] at the recent yyyy meeting. Mr. xxxx exhibited a small aluminum box which was placed in series with the tape loop of a $nn,000 preamplifier. THD, IM, and frequency response were measured with the box in the loop and with the box removed from the loop. The preamp's measurements were identical, box-in vs. box-out. Measurement resolution was 0.01% for distortion, +/- 0.05 dB for frequency response. Then, after the measurements, the audience was asked to listen to the preamp, with and without the aluminum box. Everyone agreed that the box's presence changed the sound from good to horrible even though the measurements predicted identical sound. So the aluminum box "Measured Perfect, Sounded Awful." Question: if *you* had to present such a demo, what would *you* put in the little metal box? (I _think_ I remember what the article claimed Mr. xxxx put in his box, but [i] my recollection could be wrong; [ii] netters' ideas for sound-lousy-measure-great contraptions might prove even more clever.) -- -- Mark Johnson MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques M/S 2-02, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 (408) 524-8308 mark@mips.com {or ...!decwrl!mips!mark}