Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site tekig1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!tektronix!tekig1!gregr From: gregr@tekig1.UUCP (Greg Rogers) Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: Extra speakers and audio myths Message-ID: <1578@tekig1.UUCP> Date: Thu, 15-Mar-84 05:04:45 EST Article-I.D.: tekig1.1578 Posted: Thu Mar 15 05:04:45 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Mar-84 07:24:09 EST References: <13100006@hpfcla.UUCP> <212@opus.UUCP>, <292@nbires.UUCP> Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 57 >>One time we knew something was wrong but could not figure >>out what. The most noticable effect was a very muddy low bass. >>We finally found the cause: my portable cassette deck, sitting >>in the bookcase 10 feet from the speakers, has a 4-inch monitor >>speaker in it. Removing the deck from the listening room >>immediately cleared up the problem. My first reaction to this nonsense was to laugh so hard I about fell off my chair. Most of us could fill pages explaining the relative absorbtion capabilities of a four inch cassette deck speaker to low frequencies compared to everything else in the room, windows, walls, furniture, etc. We could also point out the foolishness of the "energy stored in the crossover capacitors and reradiated sometime later" claim made in the original article that started this stupid discussion up again. Of course in this case that wouldn't be necessary since the 4-inch speaker is unlikely to have any crossover network ( to what? ). However, I soon had a second reaction, a very sad and disturbing one. I really am beginning to feel sorry for people in search of good sound quality but lacking enough background in physical sciences and electronics to understand the physical plausibility of some claims made for commercial purposes. I know very well the helpless feeling when an auto mechanic explains to me why my ball joints need replacing when I thought I just needed a front end alignment. In audio the pressure to accept an "experts" opinion can be unbearable to a novice or someone needing peer acceptance or justification for purchasing an expensive component when a far less expensive component might have produced the same result. How does one respond to something like " there, you see how much better it sounds now!"? If this comes from an "expert" (salesman, manufacturer) does one admit their inability to hear the difference particularly in a group of their peers? Indeed under these circumstances it's easy to genuinely believe differences exist where none do. This problem is made worse since an "expert" can only prove himself "expert" by consistently demonstrating his ability to discover "incredible sonic improvements" by making minor changes that others have previously overlooked. An "expert" that refuses to acknowledge the new discovery will quickly lose his "expert" status if the majority of "experts" endorse the new discovery. Since this is a no-win risk most new discoveries are quickly endorsed by all "experts" and another audio myth is born. How can someone not technically knowledgeable decide if a new "discovery" is fact or myth? I would suggest that if you only hear about it amongst the "golden ears" or in the underground audio press, that you should be very skeptible. Any valid significant new idea or principle will almost certainly receive coverage in the popular press if it can withstand the examination of the technically knowledgeable. New discoveries that can quickly be refuted are not likely to be advanced in the popular press for obvious reasons. Please note: I'm not saying believe everything you read in the popular press (particularly with regard specific products), just be wary of someone that won't present their ideas outside their own conditioned group if their ideas are really worthwhile. Greg Rogers