Dr.Toole's faith in his ears

[okiemax]

While forum members may have different ideas regarding Dr.Floyd Toole"s position on audiophile cables, I don't think anyone would dispute that he has used double-blind testing in his research on speakers. However, he may not believe sighted listening is as unreliable as some members of this forum believe it to be.

The following quote is from a July 2001 interview with Dr. Toole by Melanie Garrett of homecinemachoice.com:

"Floyd is of the opinion that technical measurements are not much use unless they can reliably predict what we as listeners will subjectively experience as good or bad sound quality. In a nutshell, he not only has faith in his own ears, but he also is interested in yours and mine as well ..."

I wondered after reading this whether Dr. Toole meant he only trusted his ears if he was listening blinded. Advice at the end of the interview article, however, seems to indicate sighted hearing is reliable enough for tweaking speaker placement.

"It may seem obvious, but the golden rule when fine-tuning your system is to experiment. Imagine sound waves traveling in straight lines and focus speakers toward the seating area. Try various speaker placements, both near and far from walls. Every movement will cause a reaction. Tweak and enjoy."

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/articles/interviews/FloydToole/FloydToole.shtml

[markw]

While forum members may have different ideas regarding Dr.Floyd Toole"s position on audiophile cables, I don't think anyone would dispute that he has used double-blind testing in his research on speakers. However, he may not believe sighted listening is as unreliable as some members of this forum believe it to be.

The following quote is from a July 2001 interview with Dr. Toole by Melanie Garrett of homecinemachoice.com:

"Floyd is of the opinion that technical measurements are not much use unless they can reliably predict what we as listeners will subjectively experience as good or bad sound quality. In a nutshell, he not only has faith in his own ears, but he also is interested in yours and mine as well ..."

I wondered after reading this whether Dr. Toole meant he only trusted his ears if he was listening blinded. Advice at the end of the interview article, however, seems to indicate sighted hearing is reliable enough for tweaking speaker placement.

"It may seem obvious, but the golden rule when fine-tuning your system is to experiment. Imagine sound waves traveling in straight lines and focus speakers toward the seating area. Try various speaker placements, both near and far from walls. Every movement will cause a reaction. Tweak and enjoy."

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/articles/interviews/FloydToole/FloydToole.shtml

Can't argue with this. Oh, this article deals with room interaction, not cables. Actually, he recommends the use of active equalizers in this article as well.

[skeptic]

Changing speaker placement correlates well with changes in frequency response we can measure. Since even small changes in the position of speakers in a room can make a significant change in what you hear, this is one variable that has to be ruled out when making AB comparisons of speaker cables. Not putting the speakers back exactly where they came from introduces a new variable which can make audible changes incorrectly attributed to the cables.


Equalizers can make improvements if they are used properly. Unfortunately the overwhelming majority of amature audiophiles have neither the experience, the patience, nor the equipment to get the best possible results out of them. Because this is one of the most powerful tools for quickly and easily changing the acoustical balance of a sound system, improper use can and usually does make things worse, much worse than they are without one. That is probably why most audiophiles quickly give up and denounce them. That plus what they've read in advertising copy.

If you don't have professional sound measuring equipment, the next best thing is to become as familiar as you can with the sound of live music and get the best possible recordings you can find. It takes a great deal of patience and a well practiced ear to properly adjust one without the benefit of the right equipment. IMO the calibrated electret condenser microphones, pink noise generators, and fluorescent spectrum analyzer displays which come with some equalizers are virtually worthless. When I have to adjust one, it takes me about a year and a half to two years to get it right.

[mtrycraft]

While forum members may have different ideas regarding Dr.Floyd Toole"s position on audiophile cables, I don't think anyone would dispute that he has used double-blind testing in his research on speakers. However, he may not believe sighted listening is as unreliable as some members of this forum believe it to be.

The following quote is from a July 2001 interview with Dr. Toole by Melanie Garrett of homecinemachoice.com:

"Floyd is of the opinion that technical measurements are not much use unless they can reliably predict what we as listeners will subjectively experience as good or bad sound quality. In a nutshell, he not only has faith in his own ears, but he also is interested in yours and mine as well ..."

I wondered after reading this whether Dr. Toole meant he only trusted his ears if he was listening blinded. Advice at the end of the interview article, however, seems to indicate sighted hearing is reliable enough for tweaking speaker placement.

"It may seem obvious, but the golden rule when fine-tuning your system is to experiment. Imagine sound waves traveling in straight lines and focus speakers toward the seating area. Try various speaker placements, both near and far from walls. Every movement will cause a reaction. Tweak and enjoy."

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/articles/interviews/FloydToole/FloydToole.shtml


If you read many of his Journal articles, you would know what he meant by "what we as listeners will subjectively experience."
He uses subjective terminology of speaker behavior under DBT listeing conditions. The listeners grades the different categories from 1-5 or 1-10, not sure, then statistical analysis us used to evaluate and compare changes made.

[okiemax]

If you read many of his Journal articles, you would know what he meant by "what we as listeners will subjectively experience."
He uses subjective terminology of speaker behavior under DBT listeing conditions. The listeners grades the different categories from 1-5 or 1-10, not sure, then statistical analysis us used to evaluate and compare changes made.

When I find one of the Journal articles on the web I will read it. I think the interview recommends using sighted listening for determining speaker placemennt. Am I wrong?

[mtrycraft]

When I find one of the Journal articles on the web I will read it. I think the interview recommends using sighted listening for determining speaker placemennt. Am I wrong?

Probably not. What has that to do with DBT comparison of say speakers? Since you are working with one set of speakers, not two sets as you compare them, it comes down to an issue of preference what position you like best.

[okiemax]

Probably not. What has that to do with DBT comparison of say speakers? Since you are working with one set of speakers, not two sets as you compare them, it comes down to an issue of preference what position you like best.


My post was not about double-blind comparisons of speakers. My post simply quoted the article that recommended sighted listening for speaker placement. Since many forum members believe sighted listening is unreliable, I thought recommending it for something as important as speaker placement was interesting.

[Pat D]

My post was not about double-blind comparisons of speakers. My post simply quoted the article that recommended sighted listening for speaker placement. Since many forum members believe sighted listening is unreliable, I thought recommending it for something as important as speaker placement was interesting.
Actually, the contention is that sighted listening is unreliable for determining small audible differences. Differences between speakers are not small, meaning that they are generally large enough to be well over the just noticeable differences. Differences in speaker placement can also make easily audible differences and I would say they often do.

[mtrycraft]

My post was not about double-blind comparisons of speakers. My post simply quoted the article that recommended sighted listening for speaker placement. Since many forum members believe sighted listening is unreliable, I thought recommending it for something as important as speaker placement was interesting.

No, but it plays into it. Why would you use a DBT to compare the same speaker in different positions? But, nothing prevents you from doing it to see where you think is the best place, althought after removing the blinds, you may not like the place :) Also, repositioning takes time, your memory fades rapidly so it is somewhat useless.

[okiemax]

Actually, the contention is that sighted listening is unreliable for determining small audible differences. Differences between speakers are not small, meaning that they are generally large enough to be well over the just noticeable differences. Differences in speaker placement can also make easily audible differences and I would say they often do.

If differences between speakers are not small, and sighted listening is reliable for differences that are not small, why did Dr. Toole use blinded tests to find out which speakers subjects preferred?

[okiemax]

No, but it plays into it. Why would you use a DBT to compare the same speaker in different positions? But, nothing prevents you from doing it to see where you think is the best place, althought after removing the blinds, you may not like the place :) Also, repositioning takes time, your memory fades rapidly so it is somewhat useless.

With help from another person you could position the speakers blinded. It might be embarassing if your helper was a practical joker, and placed one speaker on top your piano and the other facing an open door, and this turned out to be your favorite placement. But seriously, I have to think there is some best placement of speakers for a listener, and by positioning them blinded, he might remove the influence of non-audio considerations, such as how bad the things look in the middle of the floor. I have never tried blinded placement, but it would be interesting to see how it differed from my sighted arrangement.

Getting back to the point of my base post, speaker placement is important to speaker performance, and the advice in the quoted article was to use sighted listening to locate speakers for best performance. Doesn't such advice suggest a person might have confidence in his sighted listening?

[mtrycraft]

With help from another person you could position the speakers blinded. It might be embarassing if your helper was a practical joker, and placed one speaker on top your piano and the other facing an open door, and this turned out to be your favorite placement. But seriously, I have to think there is some best placement of speakers for a listener, and by positioning them blinded, he might remove the influence of non-audio considerations, such as how bad the things look in the middle of the floor. I have never tried blinded placement, but it would be interesting to see how it differed from my sighted arrangement.

Getting back to the point of my base post, speaker placement is important to speaker performance, and the advice in the quoted article was to use sighted listening to locate speakers for best performance. Doesn't such advice suggest a person might have confidence in his sighted listening?

No but it would certainly satisfy his preferences :)

[okiemax]

No but it would certainly satisfy his preferences :)

If the advice in the article is misleading, and you can't get good performance through sighted speaker placement, designing speakers for good performance may be wasted effort. Hopefully, advances in technology will give us more room-friendly user-friendly speakers, but I doubt we will ever be advised by speaker makers to just place their products anywhere we prefer.

[maxg]

If we accept that speaker preference is an entirely personal issue then accepting that speaker placement is similarly personal isnt a big step. Some people I know dont care about a soundstage at all - and do most of their listening off axis. Others are insane about it demanding whatever their definition is of a realistic soundstage - wider or narrower, deeper or shallower (often one at the expense of the other), whatever.

This means that the only person who can decide what the ideal position is is the individual listener. As there is effectively no way to measure preference in this vein the point of a DBT is kind of irrelevent - sighted listening is a part of the experience of listening to music (a major appeal of vinyl for example is watching the disk turn - for many at least), performing the same blind is a different environment and may well therefore affect preferences unless you only ever listen with your eyes closed I suppose.

[okiemax]

If we accept that speaker preference is an entirely personal issue then accepting that speaker placement is similarly personal isnt a big step. Some people I know dont care about a soundstage at all - and do most of their listening off axis. Others are insane about it demanding whatever their definition is of a realistic soundstage - wider or narrower, deeper or shallower (often one at the expense of the other), whatever.

This means that the only person who can decide what the ideal position is is the individual listener. As there is effectively no way to measure preference in this vein the point of a DBT is kind of irrelevent - sighted listening is a part of the experience of listening to music (a major appeal of vinyl for example is watching the disk turn - for many at least), performing the same blind is a different environment and may well therefore affect preferences unless you only ever listen with your eyes closed I suppose.

All speakers I have ever owned came with manuals that were specific as to placement for best performance. Do's with some speakers are don'ts for others, assuming you are interested in the performance intended by the manufacturer. Corner placement, for example, is recommended for my Radio Shack PRO-LX550's but is not recommended for my Linn Kans. Of course I am free to put them anywhere I like. But if I just go by what I think looks best, I may compromise performance.

[WmAx]

All speakers I have ever owned came with manuals that were specific as to placement for best performance. Do's with some speakers are don'ts for others, assuming you are interested in the performance intended by the manufacturer. Corner placement, for example, is recommended for my Radio Shack PRO-LX550's but is not recommended for my Linn Kans. Of course I am free to put them anywhere I like. But if I just go by what I think looks best, I may compromise performance.
RE: PRO-LX550. Is this one of the RS speakers that has the hybrid-dipole linaeum tweeter on the top? If so, then placing this speaker closer then approx. 2.5' to any wall/corner will degrade performance. The broadband dispersion, especially in the treble band, will cause heavy early reflections. Spacing at 2.5' or greater will yeild a sufficient delay to enhance spatial detail. I recommend using a padding/damping and/or diffusion structures behind these units if you 'must' use them close to the corners. Ideally, you would want to distance them from corners.

-Chris

[okiemax]

RE: PRO-LX550. Is this one of the RS speakers that has the hybrid-dipole linaeum tweeter on the top? If so, then placing this speaker closer then approx. 2.5' to any wall/corner will degrade performance. The broadband dispersion, especially in the treble band, will cause heavy early reflections. Spacing at 2.5' or greater will yeild a sufficient delay to enhance spatial detail. I recommend using a padding/damping and/or diffusion structures behind these units if you 'must' use them close to the corners. Ideally, you would want to distance them from corners.

-Chris

Yes, the PRO-LX550 has the Linaeum dipole tweeter and a 5-inch cone woofer. These little guys were a bargin. I think I only paid $150 for a pair. I would recommend them for their, as you put it, spatial detail. Unfortunately, Radio Shack may have discontinued this model.

Here is a quote from the PRO-LX550 instructions: "Location and position are vital to your speaker's performance. The ideal location is on a table or shelf positioned near the corner of the room." I have never used them quite as close to the corners as 2.5' , but I have used them 1.5' from the wall in back. You are correct about the dipole tweeter needing some room. The Linn Kan, on the other hand, was designed to be used closer to the back wall. As I recall, the manual recommends from 2" to 12" from the back wall, and I have them at about 8".

[Pat D]

If differences between speakers are not small, and sighted listening is reliable for differences that are not small, why did Dr. Toole use blinded tests to find out which speakers subjects preferred?

Since you have obviously read a little bit by Dr. Toole on the Harman site, you could easily find the answer there.

The mere fact that you can be expected to hear a difference does not mean that bias is no longer present. As Dr. Toole points out, the order of preference for speakers in sighted auditions often differs from auditions done under blind conditions.

[mtrycraft]

but I doubt we will ever be advised by speaker makers to just place their products anywhere we prefer.


Where are you going to place them then, someplace where you don't prefer them to be?

[okiemax]

Where are you going to place them then, someplace where you don't prefer them to be?

Oh boy! You mean I can put them anywhere I like? I'll try one on top the refrigerator, and the other under the piano. Wait! My girfriend prefers them in the furnace room. She says the sound can come through those louvers in the furnace room doors.

[okiemax]

Since you have obviously read a little bit by Dr. Toole on the Harman site, you could easily find the answer there.

The mere fact that you can be expected to hear a difference does not mean that bias is no longer present. As Dr. Toole points out, the order of preference for speakers in sighted auditions often differs from auditions done under blind conditions.

Yes, I know the order of preference for the four tested speakers went from 1,2,3,4 in sighted listening, which was done first, to 1,2,4,3 in blinded testing. If sighted listening can bias speaker preference, it seems reasonable to me that it could also bias speaker placement preference.

I wonder what would have happened if the blinded test had been done first? If the listeners then also preferred 3 over 4 in sighted testing, would that mean better looking speakers will outsell better sounding speakers if the price is the same? This would be good to know if you are a speaker manufacturer.

[mtrycraft]

Yes, I know the order of preference for the four tested speakers went from 1,2,3,4 in sighted listening, which was done first, to 1,2,4,3 in blinded testing. If sighted listening can bias speaker preference, it seems reasonable to me that it could also bias speaker placement preference.

I wonder what would have happened if the blinded test had been done first? If the listeners then also preferred 3 over 4 in sighted testing, would that mean better looking speakers will outsell better sounding speakers if the price is the same? This would be good to know if you are a speaker manufacturer.


Why woul dthe result change reversing th eorder of testing. Bias is there in sighted listening so it would influence you the same, unless they revealed the results of the DBt before the sighted listening in which case it would have changed the outcome most likely as that would have biased your choices, data from that test.

[mtrycraft]

Wait! My girfriend prefers them in the furnace room. She says the sound can come through those louvers in the furnace room doors.


And, that satisfies the decorating too :) Great. :) Problem solved.

[okiemax]

Why woul dthe result change reversing th eorder of testing. Bias is there in sighted listening so it would influence you the same, unless they revealed the results of the DBt before the sighted listening in which case it would have changed the outcome most likely as that would have biased your choices, data from that test.

Yes, I had in mind letting the listeners know which speakers they preferred in the blinded test before having them do the sighted test. As you may recall, one of the small speaker systems ( C) was more attractive than another(D). In the original experiment, the listeners prefered the the sound of C to the sound of D in the sighted listening test, and then reversed the preference in the blinded listening test that followed. The conclusion was sighted listening biased the listener's opinion of which speaker system sounded better.

What I am curious about is what the results would have been if the blinded test had been done first, and the listeners had been told about their preferences in this test before doing the sighted test. We don't know for sure what the results would have been. However, we both believe D would have been preferred over C in the blinded test, as it was in the first experiment. I also suspect that despite being told about these results, the listeners might have preferred C over D in the sighted test that followed. In other words, once they saw the speakers and listened some more, they might change their minds about which sounded better, and choose the more attractive speakers, which would suggest that "looks better" trumps "sounds better."