History of the Nautilus loudspeaker • Hacker News Board

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#161

Post by brokenmachine » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 5:54 AM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #147

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your disbelief. I was also in disbelief as I expected the speakers to be a joke and wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it myself. But they are as much above cheap studio monitors as the monitors are above regular hifi speakers. I guess there is some DSP magic at play, but they realy sound that good. Really the only way we could resolve this issue is that you waste $30 and listen for yourself.

No, you can't change the laws of physics, especially not with miniscule cabinets, a single 3" woofer, two 1.5" midrange drivers and a paltry ~10W of total amplification. It simply isn't physically possible, no matter how much DSP "magic" you throw at it. If you're genuinely serious and believe these tiny speakers are truly amazing, please do spend the $30 yourself and send a set to Amir at audiosciencereview.com, so…

Maybe they have MQA in them though. That changes everything. /s

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#162

Post by KozmoNau7 » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 7:45 AM UTC

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #159

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You claimed that those speakers had more accurate sound, clarity and bass reproduction than a set of studio monitors costing 100x as much. That sort of statement needs to be backed up by serious, verifiable facts. So please go right ahead and back up your extraordinary claims with some verifiable proof. Distortion measurements would be a good start. As I previously mentioned, Amir at audiosciencereview.com has the ne…

I said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity. I told you you need to investigate it yourself as I have no way to convey that information over the internet. They just sound very clear, detailed and precise. The 0.5% claim seems quite believable after you listen to them. They are small, but with low distortion. Then tell that Amir guy to test them. I don't know him.

> " said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity."

Based on what, exactly? Do you have any sort of verifiable information to back up that claim?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you are making some very extraordinary claims. You seem to be very firm in your beliefs, but completely unmotivated to actually put them to the test.

Do you really honestly and seriously believe that a $25 set of gimmick speakers can match a set of $2500 studio monitors for sound quality, on even a single performance parameter, let alone overall clarity and low distortion?

I can only conclude that you are utterly delusional and that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, which a cursory glance at your comment history confirms.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#163

Post by drw85 » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:33 PM UTC

mannykannot wrote: post #100

drw85 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that still had nothing to do with comparing lossy vs lossless, or am I misunderstanding you? How does a live performance that you hear with your ears at a specific place in a room help you pick out missing parts in a different recording, played by different people in a different place, recorded with multiple mics and then mixed and mastered?

It seems plausible to me. I assume that when you are doing a comparison, you are comparing a single source to a memory (does anyone do comparisons by playing two synchronized sources together, possibly into different ears?) In that case, I can well imagine that listening to multiple live performances primes one's mind to remember clearly how a given presentation sounded, and to pick out small differences, precisely b…

Of course you can train your ears, to be able to hear more detail and learn to differentiate and identify frequencies.

That'll definitely help with hearing differences between two tracks. But i don't think you can compare live music to recorded tracks. Especially acoustic instruments, the room is such a big factor with those.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#164

Post by drw85 » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:37 PM UTC

bayindirh wrote: post #81

drw85 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that still had nothing to do with comparing lossy vs lossless, or am I misunderstanding you? How does a live performance that you hear with your ears at a specific place in a room help you pick out missing parts in a different recording, played by different people in a different place, recorded with multiple mics and then mixed and mastered?

It has, but in a different w.r.t comparing different sound systems with the same recording. Let me try to explain. You might know some of the following, sorry if it's a re-explanation. In a proper concert hall, sound is expected to be homogenous, so you should be able listen to the orchestra equally well, with the same sound balance (or mix) regardless of the place you sit. Similarly, recordings are done from suspend…

I think i understand what you mean.

Comparing two orchestras can be similar to comparing a recording in MP3 to FLAC.

I think i get the point in that learning to listen to those details and recognize frequencies can enhance your ability to spot differences in encoded audio.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#165

Post by mannykannot » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 4:03 PM UTC

drw85 wrote: post #163

mannykannot wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems plausible to me. I assume that when you are doing a comparison, you are comparing a single source to a memory (does anyone do comparisons by playing two synchronized sources together, possibly into different ears?) In that case, I can well imagine that listening to multiple live performances primes one's mind to remember clearly how a given presentation sounded, and to pick out small differences, precisely b…

Of course you can train your ears, to be able to hear more detail and learn to differentiate and identify frequencies. That'll definitely help with hearing differences between two tracks. But i don't think you can compare live music to recorded tracks. Especially acoustic instruments, the room is such a big factor with those.

I am not actually suggesting that one should compare recorded music to live performances for the purpose of comparing audio encoding technologies. Oddly, your reply to bayindirh is in complete agreement with what I wrote here.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#166

Post by Gauge_Irrahphe » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #162

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity. I told you you need to investigate it yourself as I have no way to convey that information over the internet. They just sound very clear, detailed and precise. The 0.5% claim seems quite believable after you listen to them. They are small, but with low distortion. Then tell that Amir guy to test them. I don't know him.

> " said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity." Based on what, exactly? Do you have any sort of verifiable information to back up that claim? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you are making some very extraordinary claims. You seem to be very firm in your beliefs, but completely unmotivated to actually put them to the test. Do you really honestly and seriously believe that a $25…

Based on comparing them with studio monitors. They sound more like good headphones or not like speakers at all. They can play string bass. The drums sound unamplified on good enough recordings. There is no doubt that their distortion is extraordinarily low, and it's not the distortion of the amplifier but the speakers. I don't know how you expect me to prove it to you.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#167

Post by StavrosK » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

bwang29 wrote: post #4

I used to work in boutique audio retail. One of the big challenges of the business is how big and heavy good speakers are. In the old days we would need to crate the speaker to customers’ house for audition as every room has a different acoustic, and try a few different speakers with more crates with a upfront fee/credit to purchase, but it doesn’t happen nearly as often anymore. Showrooms nowadays also mostly do not…

Speaker emulation sounds weird, it'd either make speakers useless right away, or it would be impossible to do. Sounds like a risky business.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#168

Post by bayindirh » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

drw85 wrote: post #164

bayindirh wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has, but in a different w.r.t comparing different sound systems with the same recording. Let me try to explain. You might know some of the following, sorry if it's a re-explanation. In a proper concert hall, sound is expected to be homogenous, so you should be able listen to the orchestra equally well, with the same sound balance (or mix) regardless of the place you sit. Similarly, recordings are done from suspend…

I think i understand what you mean. Comparing two orchestras can be similar to comparing a recording in MP3 to FLAC. I think i get the point in that learning to listen to those details and recognize frequencies can enhance your ability to spot differences in encoded audio.

Yes. Listening many orchestras, especially live, helps you build an innate understanding about music and which sounds are natural and which are not.

In turn this creates a vast network which allows you further decode the music you're listening. This is how one learns to feel the music.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#169

Post by drw85 » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

mannykannot wrote: post #165

drw85 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you can train your ears, to be able to hear more detail and learn to differentiate and identify frequencies. That'll definitely help with hearing differences between two tracks. But i don't think you can compare live music to recorded tracks. Especially acoustic instruments, the room is such a big factor with those.

I am not actually suggesting that one should compare recorded music to live performances for the purpose of comparing audio encoding technologies. Oddly, your reply to bayindirh is in complete agreement with what I wrote here.

I think he explained it a little better. I totally understand that you'll learn to identify which frequencies and sounds belong to which instrument and in turn learn to identify when those are missing.

I guess that also teaches your ears to identify differences in other situations more clearly.

That's what mixing and mastering engineers practice their whole career and get really good at.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#170

Post by KozmoNau7 » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 6:18 PM UTC

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #166

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> " said it would cost 100 times as much to match the clarity." Based on what, exactly? Do you have any sort of verifiable information to back up that claim? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you are making some very extraordinary claims. You seem to be very firm in your beliefs, but completely unmotivated to actually put them to the test. Do you really honestly and seriously believe that a $25…

Based on comparing them with studio monitors. They sound more like good headphones or not like speakers at all. They can play string bass. The drums sound unamplified on good enough recordings. There is no doubt that their distortion is extraordinarily low, and it's not the distortion of the amplifier but the speakers. I don't know how you expect me to prove it to you.

> "I don't know how you expect me to prove it to you."

By providing objective measurements, as I have written in multiple previous comments already.

If you do not have measurements at hand, or the necessary gear to undertake them yourself, Amir at audiosciencereview.com has the gear, skills and experience to perform in-depth detailed speaker measurements. He accepts speakers shipped to him for review.

It's not very complicated: You made claims of extraordinary performance from outrageously cheap speakers. I ask you to provide evidence of this very hard to believe claim, and I even provide you a way of doing this.

Of course, Occam's Razor says you're just full of BS, which is a perfectly fine conclusion for me.