On 2007-11-27 01:19 pm, Bill Unruh wrote: > > A point is that these kind of "hearing tests" are almost > > useless in absolute terms but are indeed meaningful when > > tested and accumulated results are compared with for any > > particular individual. The consistent mean is to set up > > the listening environment to just be able to hear 1khz > > at (about, I forget the right level) -50db and then run > > the rest of the tests from that reference. As long as > > this reference marker is used for each testing session > > then the results can be reliable for that individual. > > ?? And that particular pair of headphones (and another of the same brand > can be different significantly) And placing them on your head in exactly > same way ( esp for "on the ear" or "in the ear" resonances in the aural > cavities can change the amplitude a lot) Presumably the documentation that comes with this mythical non existent proggie would explain these basic points and advise the end user how best to set up the tests and apply any results... and optionally offer to tweak some system wide EQ settings based on results. I've had one formal hearing test and I had to step inside a small booth, close the door, and put on a pair of passive noise cancelling headphones... took about 15 minutes and I walked away with a crude printout and another appointment for the following year. I remember looking at the printout and thinking "how could I use something like Jamin to master what I generally listen to according to these results and automatically apply any compensation?". --markc ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Alsa-user mailing list Alsa-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-user
