[Andrew Haley]

Gary Eickmeier wrote:
ScottW wrote:
On May 17, 3:48 am, "Gary Eickmeier" wrote:

The conversation is going to break down into hyperbole (or perhaps
already has).
Speaker design is a series of compromises and each design path has a
different set. Many of these are to address characteristics of
different rooms and/or listener preference.

I would agree that the choice of compromise is worthy of debate. I'm
not sure I would agree that the "perfect speaker" is omnidirectional
given the objective is to recreate a sound of an event in one location
in a completely different (acoustically) location.

Thanks Scotty. This is, at least, the beginnings of a conversation
about a difficult and controversial topic. Audio Empire is a great
source - at least it seems that way, from his writing, but I know
not who he is, what credentials he has, if that matters so much to
him - but he seems to be figuratively sticking his fingers in his
ears, shutting his eyes, and erecting Engineers Club, Members Only
signs all around his cubicle.

I don't think that's it exactly. He's saying look, you have all these
opinions, and these guys over here have opinions too, but they also
have data and reserach studies. It's not about who is qualified to
have an opinion; everyone is.

That is not constructive, and avoids a lot of discussion that I was
hoping he could handle. I have run into this time and time again.

Maybe I am Chicken Little, making waves about a completely
unimportant or nonexistent problem. Maybe not. I do not have an
engineering degree - but that hasn't stopped a lot of "experts" in
the field of audio who are making products that have no real
merit. Audio is a funny subject. It's like, it's invisible and
completely subjective, so you can say almost anything you want about
various aspects of it and you might sell something. I realize that I
need to "do the work" and prove some of my ideas with experiments
with armies of college students filling out forms, blind listening
tests, and testimonials from other "experts."

Well, yes.

The questions I have to ask a what kind of evidence would it take
to convince you that you were wrong? How would you design an
experiment that has the best chance to refute your own theories as
convincingly as possible?

Andrew.