Objective vs. Subjective: The Role of Data and Human Perception in Audio Gear

Learn about the impact of empirical data versus emotional data on the development of audio gear from EveAnna Manley of Manley Labs in this clip.

LINKS:

Book a one to one call...

#AudioUniversity

Disclaimer: This description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click them, I will receive a small commission at no cost to you.

[jaakanshorter]

I love this interview. I love hearing someone that really knows what they are talking about and can explain it in a way that doesn't sound like marketing speak.

[SpeederXL]

The problem when it comes to music, is also about having no neutral reference.
If you do a good live recording for example, you will clearly hear any deviations during playback, compared to what it sounded like in real life. Now if you verify your technical parameters on the recording gear, such as frequency response, THD and noise floor, you will pretty much know that no significant deviations will be introduced there. That way you can tweak your gear to give as little "coloration" of the sound as possible - which will be good for most sounds.
This become very clear for non musical sounds (as I record a lot of).
Those sounds are often more recognised and more people know what they are supposed to sound like. Some headphones for example, might sound quite ok for mastered music, but is abolute trash if played back something like car or train sounds, or just recordings of people talking and doing everyday stuff in real environments.
Same for room acoustics with speakers
- most rooms that's not anechoic chambers or with very little reflections (a small amound of diffused reflections might also be acceptable, but not much), sound like trash for non musical recordings and even for live music, made in a real environement. But mastered music, can almost be played back in a stairwell and still sound ok.
But, it's pretty much never the other way around - most headphones that sound good (and really give the feeling of "being at the place" when a good recordings are played back) for non musical sounds and live music, also sound good for matered music (or I wouldn't say mastered music sound good in general, due to being ruined by things like dynamic compression, but as good as it can, so to say)
And a good room with anechoic or close to anechoic conditions may sound "a little dry" for some mastered music that's completely missing it's own acoustic signature, but never really bad and great for all other sounds.
So an as neutral playback as possible is still to prefer - even though, in certain cases, a worse speaker for example, might sound better or a crappy room, might add an environment to a "completely lifeless" mastered audio track.

The problem, when you just buy music, is that you often don't know exactly how it's supposed to sound and what errors that might have been introduced during the recording (which is often a lot, as commercial recordings isn't the best), so even if it sound good, your system may still be off by a lot, so to say. If the bass levels are too low for example, you might dial up the bass - but it can as well be the recording that lack bass. On a better recoding you will now get way too much bass istead.

Because of this, I can think a transformer that is worse in every way compared ta a physically/technically better one, might actually sound better during certain conditions.

[PaulEubanks]

This is what was attempted to be quantified by the Harmon curve, no? They started with what gave people the goose bumps, and then worked backwards to quantify what frequency ranges people preferred in those listening tests.

[thinkIndependent]

Way To Go!!! Dude you are hitting new levels twords your Original Goal !!!

We don't know each other but I'm proud !!

Because I do understand Ground Breaking!!!

[LearTrough]

Objectivity in audio quality can cover all the subjective stuff, but we just don't have the knowledge of what to measure or how to measure all the parameters which matter yet. So, for quite some time in the near future, we need to keep relying on our senses and feelings.

This is similar to a lot of those spiritual, divine or metaphysical stuff. Some skeptics/cynics/rationals, whatever you call them, will now attack me by replying to my comment, if they are around and find this comment.

[hansvos]

An important video...That's why I love all info but ind the end my ears-body-feeling decides. Without technique no tools, no creation, without feeling, no music, no art.

[estimatingonediscoveringthree]

I’m trying to design a system that can generate a low frequency home or a buzz or sound that can travel a relatively far distance to be used as a signal to a operator. Do you have any recommendations for what filtering I should use ? speaker? I was going to use a raspberry pie and a tone generator and an amp and a 12 V DC power supply and speaker, large one.

[phpn]

Manley is like a 1950s engine manufacturer ; if you want a hot rod go for it, but this is not the future.

[davidg]

When it comes to audio matters, always let your ears be the final arbiter.
With modern DAWs giving multiple visual ways to analyze every frequency and amplitude and phase, many people have become reliant on their eyes to tell them whether something *should* sound good. I've seen some people who let their eyes override what their ears might otherwise tell them, and others whose visual reliance cause their ears to never develop to even be able to discern a difference.