Interesting blog about Reason RV7000 [thread five years dead, resurrected]

[kmonkey]

As you guess this is the man behind Propellerhead software Ernst Nathorst-Böös.

link: http://nathorst.net/blog/?p=17

copy paste:
I recently held a seminar to people distributing Propellerhead Software products, people from all over the world. As part of that seminar we had a blind test comparing our software reverb with a Lexicon 480 and TC Electronic Reverb 6000. The examples were prepared by mix engineer Niklas Flyckt, who recently won a Grammy for his work with Britney Spears. Niklas uses TC and Lexicon reverbs in his daily work and also created some of the presets for the RV7000. This guy knew what he was doing when he was given the task to create fair examples to compare the quality of the three units.

In the test we asked around 30 people to single out the reverb with the "best quality", in each example, but left the definition of that term to them. As it turned out, the RV7000 won. That's insane, after all, this is a software reverb that is only a small part of a USD449 product and it goes up against the reverb hardware giants of this world, costing more than ten times as much. Plus you can use a dozen or more RV7000s on the computer you already have. We knew we were good, but even we were surprised about the results.

The main point is that it was a blind test. The people listening to the examples were not influenced by preconceptions, what they saw, the aura surrounding a brand, or the price. The only thing that counted was what they heard.

I read a lot of music and audio magazines. I read tests of sound cards, mixers, mic preamps, EQs, etc. And I have this nagging feeling that 95% of what I read about what is supposed to be objective information about sound quality is in fact 100% glorified bullshit. Think about it. Have you ever seen an article where the writer wrote "we took this fantastic new AD/DA box and ran a proper double blind test against a shitty old USB audio interface that we had lying around. And boy was there a difference! Everyone in the room could spot the expensive unit every time"?

Doesn't ring a bell? Not with me either, I don't even think that text has ever been written. But have you ever thought of why you haven't read that article? I have.

A friend of mine told me that a well known American musician/producer, a guy that is really, really anal about his studio and his sound, once confessed to him that he had been EQing a snare for a long time, to find the perfect timbre, only to find out that the EQ hadn't been patched in the first place. I'm not the least surprised.

Sound is difficult and hearing is a very complex phenomenon, influenced by sight, preconceptions and thousands of other things. But most of all, by level. Cheat with level matching and you can fool practically anyone.

In a speaker test I read about, the biggest differentiating factor was what brand of speaker the listeners thought they were hearing, not what they actually heard. I could write for ever about this, but it's time to come to a conclusion: If you read any, and I mean any statement, about the objective but perceived sound quality of this or that device, software or hardware, and the people haven't done a comparative blind test (preferably a double blind), then, whatever you are reading is pointless, worthless, meaningless information. Now prove me wrong.



Post a comment...

[nuffink]

And I have this nagging feeling that 95% of what I read about what is supposed to be objective information about sound quality is in fact 100% glorified bullshit.

So true. As is the rest of it.

[Hovmod]

Heehee - cue debate about Reason and VSTs.

Blind tests are cool. The CEO of Monster Cable couldn't differentiate his own top cable from regular copper 1.5mm2 power cable.
Homeopathic medicine doesn't work.

The thing is, people are so religious about their preconceptions that they say things like "but the ear is better than [your measuring device]." or "this proves beyond doubt that double-blind placebo testing is the wrong tool to test homeopathic medicines".

Blind tests are bastards. Don't ever blind test *after* you've spent your hard-earned cash.

[nuffink]

Blind tests are bastards. Don't ever blind test *after* you've spent your hard-earned cash.

I reckon everybody involved with making music should participate in a few double blind or ABX tests.
I don't care how good you think your ears are, you'll be shocked.

[Meffy]

This is why I'm glad to have a plain old stainless steel ears instead of the precious metal kind. (That and I can throw 'em like shuriken for extra action-movie excitement.)

I've loved the RV7000 since I first clapped ears (the stainless steel ones, yes) on it. Nice to hear others think it's got superior sound too but, for better or worse, my own ears are the only ones I can hear through... so they're the only ones I can fully trust. :-)

[bmanic]

Would be interesting to hear what audience was doing the blind test. Have a blind test on wines for a group of average John Does and I guarantee you they will pick out a 20$ wine over the 100000$ stuff but do the same test with the most experienced group of wine testers and the result might differ, a lot.

- bManic

[bmanic]

Blind tests are bastards. Don't ever blind test *after* you've spent your hard-earned cash.

I reckon everybody involved with making music should participate in a few double blind or ABX tests.
I don't care how good you think your ears are, you'll be shocked.

Very much agree here. ABX testing is essential and also a very good tool for learning.

- bManic

[kmonkey]

Would be interesting to hear what audience was doing the blind test. Have a blind test on wines for a group of average John Does and I guarantee you they will pick out a 20$ wine over the 100000$ stuff but do the same test with the most experienced group of wine testers and the result might differ, a lot.

- bManic

Uhmm....Very very true.

[bmanic]

Oh, one more thing. How do you conduct a blind test on a reverb? It's such an essential thing in a mix and a bad reverb only becomes truly obvious in a mixing situation and one creates a mix slightly differently depending on how the reverb sounds.. food for thought. Been battling with this myself as well. It's quite easy to show if reverb A's tail is denser than reverb B but this doesn NOT mean that A is worse sounding in a mix, not at all.

- bManic

[Meffy]

Looks to me as if the testers were music software distributors. Not total Joes off the street, not expert recording engineers, but somewhere in between.

[kmonkey]

Yet still... i think that there is no 100 000$ worth wine. And there should not be any. This goes in insanity area

People behind 100 000$ wine are goes to that glorified bullshit area i think.

1.bottle of 100 000$ worth wine = Overpriced shit.

[anopenscroll]

So then we consider... does most of the general populace even care about the $100000 wine or Lexicon?

[nuffink]

Would be interesting to hear what audience was doing the blind test. Have a blind test on wines for a group of average John Does and I guarantee you they will pick out a 20$ wine over the 100000$ stuff but do the same test with the most experienced group of wine testers and the result might differ, a lot.

- bManic

Uhmm....Very very true.

It might be true with wine, it certainly ain't with -
Cables
AD converters
Soundcards

To name a just few things that I've seen the golden eared fail miserably at differentiating under test conditions.

[Scot Solida]

Pen and Teller could dedicate a whole season of their "Bullshit" program to the audio industry. Most of us musicians aren't any better than the poor sap who lays down hard-earned dough to a palm reader. We want the ego-boost, the extra smattering of confidence. There simply are no absolutes when it comes to music production. What one listener loves, another will loathe. That is an open door to insecurity, and the music equipment industry expends an incredible amount of effort to exploit those insecurities.

I personally have spent a lot of time lately doing blind tests of cables, software and hardware mixers, mics and pre-amps. For the most part, I have found that an exhorbitant increase in price and hype generally provides (at best) a nominal improvement in signal quality. Most people coming into the studio can't tell the difference at all. I myself have invested a lot of money in high-end stuff, and sometimes it pays off, sometimes it doesn't. A crap mic can still provide a great recording in the hands of a great engineer. And all the most expensive gear on the planet isn't gonna save a poor or lazy engineer's tracks.

The music gear industry pitches us a "Holy Grail" in the form of "sound quality". The simple fact is that your sound could always be improved, no matter what gear you use. A better mic position can provide far more profound improvements than an umpteen thousand dollar mic pre (or God forbid, a thousand dollar mic cable).

And yeah, I do indeed use expensive preamps, decent mics and a ridiculously large hardware analogue modular. But do I do so because they inherently provide superior signals? On the contrary. I do so because I like particular characteristics that each can provide. These charactersistics were once seen as deficits to the signal quality. Would my records be inferior if I didn't use these things? Heck no. I'd still be placing the same notes in front of one another, and that's what counts.

Some equipment companies would like you to forget that. They would like you to believe that compositional and engineering skills are second to the cost of your kit, because they can't promise to sell you talent.

I have said it before, but it bears repeating: I have never, ever heard a kid say "gee, this song would be great if the engineers used better cables".

Great recordings have been made and will continue to be made by people who have limited means and limited gear. Nothing will get in the way of a good idea, and no amount of hype will turn a bad song into a good one. A hit song, perhaps, but not a good song.

[Meffy]

So then we consider... does most of the general populace even care about the $100000 wine or Lexicon?

Only if they knock the wine bottle over and it spills on the Lexicon. Then they start caring.

BTW, Penn and Teller completely and utterly RULE. And yes, I can tell Penn from Teller in an A/B listening test.