Meaningful measurements have driven the industry toward timbral neutrality

Evidence

Electrical and acoustical measurements have been with us a long time, and we became very good at doing them a long time ago. Now we can do them faster and less expensively, and we are able to measure more dimensions, but good data from decades ago is as trustworthy as good data from today. The problem in audio was that the data were limited, in analog form and not easy to interpret. Now, with more data, all in digital form, it is possible to manipulate it in ways that were impossible or impractical in the analog era. It is possible to create versions of the data that bear a closer relationship to what we hear than the raw data itself. — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 170 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Timbral neutrality drives 69.5 percent of sound-quality preference; Digital processing makes measurements better approximate what we hear — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 170

Related

• Digital processing makes measurements better approximate what we hear (similarity 0.90)
• Perceptual auditory models will eventually replace traditional audio metrics (similarity 0.81)
• Timbral neutrality drives 69.5 percent of sound-quality preference (similarity 0.81)
• Precise tuning forks revealed auditory phenomena digital tools still struggle to match (similarity 0.80)
• Subjective experience dictates which measurements matter in audio research (similarity 0.80)
• Early loudspeaker preference studies were too crude to validate any measurement model (similarity 0.80)
• The ‘we can’t measure what we hear’ myth stems from inadequate measurements (similarity 0.79)
• Early speaker tests were so flawed any measurement correlated with perception (similarity 0.79)
• Measurable and audible sound qualities can be shown to correlate reliably (similarity 0.79)
• Measurement research aims to map objective data onto subjective sound quality ratings (similarity 0.79)
• Technical measurement is necessary for subjective audio judgments to be meaningful. (similarity 0.79)
• Neutral loudspeakers should be transparent messengers of the art (similarity 0.79)
• Neutral reproductions serve as a reliable baseline for tonal preferences (similarity 0.79)
• Subjective sound quality is authoritative and measurements must explain it (similarity 0.79)
• Any measurable data can be rendered as sound to enable rapid pattern exploration (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Timbral neutrality drives 69.5 percent of sound-quality preference #qualifies (0.82)
• Digital processing makes measurements better approximate what we hear #expands (0.78) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 170