Login / Register  0 items | $0.00 New

Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

himalaya
KVRAF
 
4353 posts since 23 Mar, 2006, from pendeLondonmonium

Postby himalaya; Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:54 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:
himalaya wrote:One very simple explanation why none of this matters is because you have no control over it.

So one explanation that "it doesn't matter" is because you don't have control over it? It doesn't makes ANY sense.
So the world hunger doesn't matter because I can't resolve it? Come one!! It seems "it matters", but you can't do anything for it, so you can only ACCEPT it. But don't say "it doesn't matter": totally different think, approach and awareness.


Have you lost track of the conversation which brought the "it doesn't matter" claim? It seems you have.
I recommend you re-read our conversation because it's all spelled out numerous times: What doesn't matter and why. It all there. I kid you not. Do me a favour and read again. This will stop you from completely inappropriate comparisons of your predicament plus my answers with world hunger. Very naughty! Once you read it again you will understand it does not matter as you can not do anything about it ("about what?" I hear you cry....read back and find out). Whereas the world hunger does matter and we can do a lot to help the situation. Bye!

(let me know when the TV series of this thread will be screened! :D )
http://www.electric-himalaya.com
VSTi and hardware synth sound design
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:23 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

whyterabbyt wrote:
Nowhk wrote:The unanswered question is "why" this doesn't matter.


Multiple answers have been given.

But since you cant accept that, here is the final, absolute, singular answer.

It doesnt matter because it doesnt matter.

If you wish to try and refute that answer, your only valid starting point is to prove that it does matter. And you cannot prove that.

When I hear a song produced by some master, the kickdrum I heard Is punchy, the "click" introduced by those heavy transients screw up my intestines. THAT click! With my pro loudspeaker, mmmm... the ringing and its morbid transient place the kick muffled within my mind. Its less provocative.

Damn whyterabbyt, I think my headphone add somethings very nice. But can't be possible. Mediums can't impact this way the sound.
Please wake me up by this nightmare, tell me why and where I'm biased (if I am).

himalaya wrote:Have you lost track of the conversation which brought the "it doesn't matter" claim? It seems you have.
I recommend you re-read our conversation because it's all spelled out numerous times: What doesn't matter and why. It all there. I kid you not. Do me a favour and read again.

viewtopic.php?f=99&t=485328&start=180#p6855396 ?!?!
Really I don't know what you are talking about. You explain to me why different mediums don't matter? You just said you don't care so much about timbre :o So of course doesn't matter (for you).

himalaya wrote:Whereas the world hunger does matter and we can do a lot to help the situation.

Don't take it "naughty" because the subject is unfortunately sad; was a stinging analogy... :(
User avatar
whyterabbyt
Beware the Quoth
 
25104 posts since 3 Sep, 2001, from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair

Postby whyterabbyt; Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:57 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:
Nowhk wrote:The unanswered question is "why" this doesn't matter.


Multiple answers have been given.

But since you cant accept that, here is the final, absolute, singular answer.

It doesnt matter because it doesnt matter.

If you wish to try and refute that answer, your only valid starting point is to prove that it does matter. And you cannot prove that.

When I hear a song produced by some master, the kickdrum I heard Is punchy, the "click" introduced by those heavy transients screw up my intestines. THAT click! With my pro loudspeaker, mmmm... the ringing and its morbid transient place the kick muffled within my mind. Its less provocative.

Damn whyterabbyt, I think my headphone add somethings very nice. But can't be possible. Mediums can't impact this way the sound.
Please wake me up by this nightmare, tell me why and where I'm biased (if I am).(


Which bit of 'prove that it matters' are you having a problem with?
"The bearer of this signature is a genuine and authorised pope."
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:05 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

whyterabbyt wrote:
Nowhk wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:
Nowhk wrote:The unanswered question is "why" this doesn't matter.


Multiple answers have been given.

But since you cant accept that, here is the final, absolute, singular answer.

It doesnt matter because it doesnt matter.

If you wish to try and refute that answer, your only valid starting point is to prove that it does matter. And you cannot prove that.

When I hear a song produced by some master, the kickdrum I heard Is punchy, the "click" introduced by those heavy transients screw up my intestines. THAT click! With my pro loudspeaker, mmmm... the ringing and its morbid transient place the kick muffled within my mind. Its less provocative.

Damn whyterabbyt, I think my headphone add somethings very nice. But can't be possible. Mediums can't impact this way the sound.
Please wake me up by this nightmare, tell me why and where I'm biased (if I am).(


Which bit of 'prove that it matters' are you having a problem with?

Well, the only thing that is changed is the medium. My different perception is the prove. Can you proof is it a bias? Any blind test? Because I could be right if you can't prove the opposite.
User avatar
whyterabbyt
Beware the Quoth
 
25104 posts since 3 Sep, 2001, from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair

Postby whyterabbyt; Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:30 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:
Which bit of 'prove that it matters' are you having a problem with?

Well, the only thing that is changed is the medium. My different perception is the prove.


So, by logical consistency, you're saying that if any single person doesnt perceive the difference, then that is equal proof that it doesnt matter?

So like I say, it doesnt matter. Especially since none of us are here to prove a rationale for your individual perception of reality; that's something that is entirely yours to wrestle with.

Can you proof is it a bias? Any blind test?


I dont need to because it doesnt matter. You have to prove that it matters, get it?

Because I could be right if you can't prove the opposite.


No, that's not how it works. You have to prove your propositon, we dont have to disprove it. You have demanded an explanation for a thing you say is true. To warrant that explanation, you have to prove it is true.
"The bearer of this signature is a genuine and authorised pope."
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:59 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

whyterabbyt wrote:So, by logical consistency, you're saying that if any single person doesnt perceive the difference, then that is equal proof that it doesnt matter?

So like I say, it doesnt matter.

Not at all. If you can't perceive the differences, of course it doesn't matter.
But you are so out of the equation; we are talking about people that is able to listen music with some deep.

I mean: if you are talking about kids that listen Bieber ok, I agree; but so you can also remove all arrangement in the background, "it doesn't matter" for us. These people are not the target for this discussion.

I hope that I'm talking with experienced people. Which can catch those differences between mediums. It seems that all you (as said by many) get them. Else why there are millions of different pro headphones, millions of pro loudspeakers, millions of flat, and so on? Pure marketing? I believe because somethings "adds" for the ones who prefer those addiction.

But I'm talking with you. You had never unbalanced about your opinion about this.
Do you catch those differences whyterabbyt between pro equipment? Yes, no?
I don't have understand this from you yet. Can you tell me?
User avatar
whyterabbyt
Beware the Quoth
 
25104 posts since 3 Sep, 2001, from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair

Postby whyterabbyt; Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:33 pm Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:So, by logical consistency, you're saying that if any single person doesnt perceive the difference, then that is equal proof that it doesnt matter?

So like I say, it doesnt matter.

Not at all. If you can't perceive the differences, of course it doesn't matter. But you are so out of the equation; we are talking about people that is able to listen music with some deep.


So you're not prepared to be logically consistent then? You're now adding conditionals as to who it does or does not matters to?

But adapting to your shifted goalposts, then by logical consistency - if anyone who can perceive it doesn't think it matters, then it doesnt matter, yes?

Cue goalpost-shifting....


I mean: if you are talking about kids that listen Bieber ok, I agree; but so you can also remove all arrangement in the background, "it doesn't matter" for us. These people are not the target for this discussion.


And where exactly did you ever define the scope of the target for discussion ?

Else why there are millions of different pro headphones, millions of pro loudspeakers, millions of flat, and so on? Pure marketing? I believe because somethings "adds" for the ones who prefer those addiction.


Are you claiming that all those devices have the exact same specification?

If not, that doesn't really seem like proof that different specifications matter.

But I'm talking with you. You had never unbalanced about your opinion about this.
Do you catch those differences whyterabbyt between pro equipment? Yes, no?
I don't have understand this from you yet. Can you tell me?


No, this is about your perception, not mine. Its about your implication that it has to matter enough such that we are obligated to satisfy you with a rebuttal.

But it doesnt matter because it doesnt matter. That is the absolute core explanation; the absolute end of any obligation on the part of anyone else here to provide any other more detailed or finessed explanation.
It is up to you to justify why it might even begin to matter in the first place before anyone needs to bother providing more of a rebuttal than that.



Do you understand what Im saying to you?

{edit for grammar}
Last edited by whyterabbyt on Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The bearer of this signature is a genuine and authorised pope."
User avatar
Gamma-UT
KVRAF
 
3769 posts since 8 Jun, 2009, from UK

Postby Gamma-UT; Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:53 pm Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:Not at all. If you can't perceive the differences, of course it doesn't matter.
But you are so out of the equation; we are talking about people that is able to listen music with some deep.


Nowhk wrote:How many times I have to told you "I don't give a fXXk about listeners"?


Which Nowhk is in charge? Can you prove they are all the same person? If they are the same, does it matter?
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:09 pm Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

whyterabbyt wrote:But adapting to your shifted goalposts, then by logical consistency - if anyone who can perceive it doesn't think it matters, then it doesnt matter, yes?

Cue goalpost-shifting....

Its not shifted. It wrap into my logic. Somethings different must happened before you can conclude it does or it doesn't happens. If all stay the same (i.e. you don't get the difference in perception), it seems logic to me that reasoning if "matter" make no sense. Nothing is changed, so of course it doesn't matter.
The question is if it matter once somethings change. That's why I analyze only the part where there are differences (i.e. you get the differences). I don't have any degree in logic, so proably you will destroy me in this kind of things. But really we are reasoning in these terms? :neutral:

whyterabbyt wrote:And where exactly did you ever define the scope of the target for discussion ?

I used to believe it was implicit in my beginning post; I were talking about harmonics, partials, additive synthesis, with links to ecoustics.com speakers. I was talking about some "levels" of details. Sorry if I'm been superficial, my fault. Later anyway during the conversation I've specify many times the mediums targets (flat, loudspeakers, headphones).

whyterabbyt wrote:Are you claiming that all those devices have the exact same specification?

If not, that doesn't really seem like proof that different specifications matter.

Those devices of course haven't the same specification. I just "notice" that there be some reason of why there are a vast list of all different devices. In the end you use it for playback the sound. If the differences on the same gamma of a set of speakers are meaningless, is really only marketing? Why should you buy a quality speaker instead of another, having similar price? Not for the way they sound? I "ask", not claiming.

Note: I think you all misunderstand the way I use the term "believe". I use it as "I guess, but I'm not sure". How would is the correct term in english?

whyterabbyt wrote:No, this is about your perception, not mine. Its about your implication that it has to matter enough such that we are obligated to satisfy you with a rebuttal.

Why you are so heavy reluctant on reply to this question? You don't want to reply to this easy question. You should know if the perception you have of the same musical element (let say, a kick?) differs between speakers. Why you don't want to reply is really a mystery for me.

whyterabbyt wrote:It is up to you to justify why it might even begin to matter in the first place before anyone needs to bother providing more of a rebuttal than that.

Because it seems I can catch differences, and these differences seems to influence my perception. So I ask you: do you also notice these differences? If nobody would notice them, ok its my problem (I'm biased). If someone notice them (and this has been confirmed), how do you conceive the whole task of making somethings constantly variable?
I'm just repeating myself again :ud:

whyterabbyt wrote:Do you understand what Im saying to you?

Not really, but ok, my problem :wink:

Gamma-UT wrote:
Nowhk wrote:Not at all. If you can't perceive the differences, of course it doesn't matter.
But you are so out of the equation; we are talking about people that is able to listen music with some deep.


Nowhk wrote:How many times I have to told you "I don't give a fXXk about listeners"?


Which Nowhk is in charge? Can you prove they are all the same person? If they are the same, does it matter?

No its the same, dude! Read well, again, considering the context where some phrase have been written (and stop be obsessed by my "goalpost changing"; you are failing another time). I was talking about "singular" listener that are able to listen to music in deep. Any listener: me, you, OR whyterabbyt. I "don't give a fXXk" if me and you will get the same message, without a comparison between listeners, but taking a singular listener (that is able to listen to music in deep).
User avatar
Gamma-UT
KVRAF
 
3769 posts since 8 Jun, 2009, from UK

Postby Gamma-UT; Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:01 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:No its the same, dude! Read well, again, considering the context where some phrase have been written (and stop be obsessed by my "goalpost changing"; you are failing another time). I was talking about "singular" listener that are able to listen to music in deep. Any listener: me, you, OR whyterabbyt. I "don't give a fXXk" if me and you will get the same message, without a comparison between listeners, but taking a singular listener (that is able to listen to music in deep).


No, Nowhk was talking about Nowhk initially: "But... why if I EQ that particular sound I can feel the same timbre? In fact I'm editing amplitudes of some partials. So timbre should change." I assume that was the same Nowhk that tried to slap down Himalaya with the "I don't give a fXXk". Now Nowhk' is talking about any listener.

But the other Nowhk doesn't care about listeners, only Nowhk's perception. Even if we extend that issue to the concept of sound creator, that's still not Any Listener. In reality, the distinction between creator and listener is moot but one of the Nowhks appear to believe the two things are different, so why does Nowhk' think differently?

Will the real Nowhk please stand up?
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:22 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Gamma-UT wrote:No, Nowhk was talking about Nowhk initially: "But... why if I EQ that particular sound I can feel the same timbre? In fact I'm editing amplitudes of some partials. So timbre should change." I assume that was the same Nowhk that tried to slap down Himalaya with the "I don't give a fXXk". Now Nowhk' is talking about any listener.

Yes, any listener as SINGLE. "Nowhk" is one of them. "You" are another one. Comparing between self experiences (of each listener). Not between mines and yours experiences. i.e. what himalaya was talking about, and many others of you.

Gamma-UT wrote:But the other Nowhk doesn't care about listeners, only Nowhk's perception. Even if we extend that issue to the concept of sound creator, that's still not Any Listener. In reality, the distinction between creator and listener is moot but one of the Nowhks appear to believe the two things are different, so why does Nowhk' think differently?

Bunch of nonsenses for me. Nerdy riddles? I don't need them right now.
User avatar
Gamma-UT
KVRAF
 
3769 posts since 8 Jun, 2009, from UK

Postby Gamma-UT; Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:34 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Nowhk wrote:Yes, any listener as SINGLE. "Nowhk" is one of them. "You" are another one. Comparing between self experiences (of each listener). Not between mines and yours experiences. i.e. what himalaya was talking about, and many others of you.


Is Any Listener actively EQing a sound? I think not.
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:47 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Gamma-UT wrote:Is Any Listener actively EQing a sound? I think not.

Implicitly, YES: once it choose its mediums/environments.
Speaker's frequency response change for example, which is a "similar" comparison with EQing a sound (excluding phase and such, of course). Moreover, also room's reflections mess the spectrum, or device ringing.

Also, speakers don't change "only" spectrum as EQing it, but its dynamics (transients response) as well (another discussed subject).

I alread admit that I wrong topic title, I had to use "medium" and not EQ. EQ was more practical to explain (I was wrong).
User avatar
Gamma-UT
KVRAF
 
3769 posts since 8 Jun, 2009, from UK

Postby Gamma-UT; Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:58 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Odd then how Nowhk claimed earlier their position had never changed throughout this thread. But, then again, maybe it was just a different Nowhk.
User avatar
Nowhk
KVRian
 
703 posts since 2 Oct, 2013

Postby Nowhk; Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:11 am Re: Why EQ a sound doesn't change timbre?

Gamma-UT wrote:Odd then how Nowhk claimed earlier their position had never changed throughout this thread. But, then again, maybe it was just a different Nowhk.

Their position of what? Their who? What are you talking about?

Nobody of us have replied to what I've asked. I'm not "recasting" to my favour as you dream. You think so. The question is still the same.

You are one of them, even after having write it accurately: viewtopic.php?f=99&t=485328&start=300#p6866862
But I fell like Bartender right now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alTBDlYWUnw
so think to whatever you want! :party:
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Music Theory