Hello Ketchup,
Per your request for information, we spoke with the owners of our footer experiment and were granted the right to publish some of the criterion in order to further understanding in audio. Please keep in mind that this test was an original concept to further the knowledge of the staff and to increase the quality of sound in our facility. At the time of the test the company had no intentions for the commercial sale or use from the assessment.
Test Criterion:
Day s: 10, average one hour per day electronics metering with each footer system, approximately two hours per day listening session per each footer system. The results from electronic testing were combined with listening sessions where each individual took notes on performance. The totals of participating products were reduced to a top three finalists in each category. The final three days of testing varied on listening time where the top three products were switched in and out and without regard for time requirements to insure mechanical break in period.
Electronic Test Data: RTA and SPL
Sets of Human Ears: 3
Footer Requirements: Floor born speaker systems Pair #1 ¼”-20 threading, Pair #2 6M-1.0 threading, compact monitors were tested with non threaded products placed between speaker cabinet and steel stand top only (floor spikes on monitor stands never changed).
Price Range: $25.00 to $100.00 per single cone or device, products were chosen by staff with bias placed on manufacture 30-60 day return guarantees. Products were also selected based on positive Audiogon forum feedback and reviews, longevity in service and reputation of the manufacturer. Products were purchased without the manufacturer’s knowledge of impending experiment and seven companies were represented.
Control Room:
Mixer - Microphone channel input s were calibrated and never changed, channel output faders were set for optimum house mix (varied slightly), all EQ and Processing throughout the chain were bypassed (never changed).
Amplifiers: Three stereo same make and model of amplifiers were dedicated as one amplifier per paired speaker system, amplifier outputs were run at full open. Amplifiers were rack mounted in ATA flight cases and rested on the flooring; speaker wire length varied slightly between pairs. Amplifiers remained ‘turned on’ and signal was passed without interruption throughout testing period.
Prerecorded Instruments Chosen: Channel 1 – Piano, Channel 2 – French horn, Channel 3 – Cello, Channel 4 – Acoustic Guitar, Channel 5– Electric Guitar, Channel 6 – Bass Guitar, Channel 7 – Kick Drum, Channel 8 – Snare, Channel 9 – Hi-Hat, Channel 10 – Over Head Ride Cymbal, Channel 11 – Synthesizer, Channel 12 – Male Vocal, Channel 13 – Female Vocal, Channel 14 – Female Vocal
Instrument Room:
Loudspeaker Placement: Away from all wall surfaces centrally located left and right from center, speaker placement did not change over test period
Microphone and Stand Placement: Mic 1 near field three feet off flooring (never moved), mic 2 distanced at a six foot height (never moved).
Speakers: For fairness, each speaker was allotted a 24 hour period ‘post part installation’ with constant feed of current passed through providing an equal time period electronic and mechanical break in for each product.
Human Listening Test Protocol: Testing was conducted involving individual instruments, combinations thereof with a focus on routine progression for each product. Eliminations were based on feel, emotion and overall audible presentation with crossover analogies from electronic documentation. Listening tests were first procured in studio control room. The top three finalists testing included both the control center and reviews in the instrument suite where the loudspeakers and amplifiers were located.
We will respond to any questions provided we do not breech our Agreement from the sale of this result. Product name branding is strictly prohibited.
There were no First, Second or Third Place product awards given here. The results provided us a higher level of understanding sonic differences between isolation (decoupling) and energy movement (direct coupling) processes. We state that the direct coupling method and products were chosen for our studio applications.
Per your request for information, we spoke with the owners of our footer experiment and were granted the right to publish some of the criterion in order to further understanding in audio. Please keep in mind that this test was an original concept to further the knowledge of the staff and to increase the quality of sound in our facility. At the time of the test the company had no intentions for the commercial sale or use from the assessment.
Test Criterion:
Day s: 10, average one hour per day electronics metering with each footer system, approximately two hours per day listening session per each footer system. The results from electronic testing were combined with listening sessions where each individual took notes on performance. The totals of participating products were reduced to a top three finalists in each category. The final three days of testing varied on listening time where the top three products were switched in and out and without regard for time requirements to insure mechanical break in period.
Electronic Test Data: RTA and SPL
Sets of Human Ears: 3
Footer Requirements: Floor born speaker systems Pair #1 ¼”-20 threading, Pair #2 6M-1.0 threading, compact monitors were tested with non threaded products placed between speaker cabinet and steel stand top only (floor spikes on monitor stands never changed).
Price Range: $25.00 to $100.00 per single cone or device, products were chosen by staff with bias placed on manufacture 30-60 day return guarantees. Products were also selected based on positive Audiogon forum feedback and reviews, longevity in service and reputation of the manufacturer. Products were purchased without the manufacturer’s knowledge of impending experiment and seven companies were represented.
Control Room:
Mixer - Microphone channel input s were calibrated and never changed, channel output faders were set for optimum house mix (varied slightly), all EQ and Processing throughout the chain were bypassed (never changed).
Amplifiers: Three stereo same make and model of amplifiers were dedicated as one amplifier per paired speaker system, amplifier outputs were run at full open. Amplifiers were rack mounted in ATA flight cases and rested on the flooring; speaker wire length varied slightly between pairs. Amplifiers remained ‘turned on’ and signal was passed without interruption throughout testing period.
Prerecorded Instruments Chosen: Channel 1 – Piano, Channel 2 – French horn, Channel 3 – Cello, Channel 4 – Acoustic Guitar, Channel 5– Electric Guitar, Channel 6 – Bass Guitar, Channel 7 – Kick Drum, Channel 8 – Snare, Channel 9 – Hi-Hat, Channel 10 – Over Head Ride Cymbal, Channel 11 – Synthesizer, Channel 12 – Male Vocal, Channel 13 – Female Vocal, Channel 14 – Female Vocal
Instrument Room:
Loudspeaker Placement: Away from all wall surfaces centrally located left and right from center, speaker placement did not change over test period
Microphone and Stand Placement: Mic 1 near field three feet off flooring (never moved), mic 2 distanced at a six foot height (never moved).
Speakers: For fairness, each speaker was allotted a 24 hour period ‘post part installation’ with constant feed of current passed through providing an equal time period electronic and mechanical break in for each product.
Human Listening Test Protocol: Testing was conducted involving individual instruments, combinations thereof with a focus on routine progression for each product. Eliminations were based on feel, emotion and overall audible presentation with crossover analogies from electronic documentation. Listening tests were first procured in studio control room. The top three finalists testing included both the control center and reviews in the instrument suite where the loudspeakers and amplifiers were located.
We will respond to any questions provided we do not breech our Agreement from the sale of this result. Product name branding is strictly prohibited.
There were no First, Second or Third Place product awards given here. The results provided us a higher level of understanding sonic differences between isolation (decoupling) and energy movement (direct coupling) processes. We state that the direct coupling method and products were chosen for our studio applications.