Sound power alone cannot predict listener preference for loudspeakers

Evidence

Using the spinorama collection of anechoic measurements, an evaluation of 13 loudspeakers that had recently been reviewed by CU was undertaken. All were bookshelf-sized products, and all lacked low bass. It began with a fully balanced, double-blind, listening test (every loudspeaker was auditioned against all others the same number of times) by a group of selected and trained listeners. The result is shown in Figure 11.1(a) compared with the corresponding accuracy scores for the same loudspeakers published by CU. The contrast between the two sets of data is striking, with loudspeaker 1 exhibiting both “best” and “worst” evaluations. Overall, there was no correlation between the two results, indicating that, if the subjective data are correct, the CU method of evaluation is based on a faulty premise: that a sound power measurement alone contains information necessary to describe listener perceptions of sound quality in small rooms. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1204

Categorization

  • XREF: Refutes the premises of flat/neutral speaker evaluation rooted in power-based measurements; links to Harman target curve research and Olive’s SPINorama work. — connects to: Perceived loudspeaker sound quality depends only on amplitude responses — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 711; Anechoic on-axis and sound power responses suffice to predict perceived loudspeaker quality — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 1292; On-axis curves alone cannot predict loudspeaker sound quality (+6 more)
  • SEED: Angle: how a flagship consumer-testing organization (Consumer Reports) built an entire rating methodology on an empirically falsified premise, and how a corporate R&D group beat them with randomized controlled listening tests.
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1204

Broader Connections