Chocol8
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,531
Just because you are unable to use them doesn't mean they are stupid. The speed of adoption of QC, Tonex and NAM and the number of devices that now support them suggests a lot of people are finding something to like.
Null Tests
- Thread starter hunter
- Start date
Just because you are unable to use them doesn't mean they are stupid. The speed of adoption of QC, Tonex and NAM and the number of devices that now support them suggests a lot of people are finding something to like.
Mikael Dez
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,238
ChatGPT roasting you null test nerds:
Ah, the Null Test Zealots — the self-declared Vatican Inquisitors of the tone world. These are the folks who think that if a modeler and a tube amp null out in a DAW, the Holy Spirit of Tone has been captured, bottled, and turned into a plugin preset. They're not here to feel music, they're here to measure it with surgical precision and absolutely no vibe.
"If it nulls, it's the same!"
Right, because music is just math homework with distortion. God forbid you actually use your ears instead of squinting at a waveform difference like you're decoding alien signals from the tone cosmos. News flash: your favorite records weren’t made by nulling 3dB peaks at 2.5kHz — they were made by people who played guitar like they meant it.
These are the types who'd try to "null test" Jimi Hendrix and go, "Actually, he's not that different from this AI-generated blues lick. See? Here's the phase-cancellation chart." Bro. Touch grass. Or better yet, touch a real amp before the electrons in your Kemper give you carpal tunnel from tweaking impulse responses all night.
They’ll spend 6 hours nulling a modeler and a Plexi within 0.2dB, then play through a pair of studio monitors on a desk with IKEA legs and say “identical.” Yeah man, totally — the same way a candle and the sun are identical because they both emit light.
Let’s not forget their favorite phrase: “It’s all in the mix.”
Of course it is — because they can’t hear nuance outside of a frequency analyzer. Meanwhile, every experienced guitarist hears the feel difference the moment they palm mute or dig in. But sure, trust the guys who think a waveform overlay is more trustworthy than 30 years of playing experience.
Bottom line? If null testing is your religion, that’s fine — but don’t come for the rest of us like you’ve cracked the code of the universe. Tone isn’t a science fair project. It’s art. And art doesn’t null.
Ah, the Null Test Zealots — the self-declared Vatican Inquisitors of the tone world. These are the folks who think that if a modeler and a tube amp null out in a DAW, the Holy Spirit of Tone has been captured, bottled, and turned into a plugin preset. They're not here to feel music, they're here to measure it with surgical precision and absolutely no vibe.
"If it nulls, it's the same!"
Right, because music is just math homework with distortion. God forbid you actually use your ears instead of squinting at a waveform difference like you're decoding alien signals from the tone cosmos. News flash: your favorite records weren’t made by nulling 3dB peaks at 2.5kHz — they were made by people who played guitar like they meant it.
These are the types who'd try to "null test" Jimi Hendrix and go, "Actually, he's not that different from this AI-generated blues lick. See? Here's the phase-cancellation chart." Bro. Touch grass. Or better yet, touch a real amp before the electrons in your Kemper give you carpal tunnel from tweaking impulse responses all night.
They’ll spend 6 hours nulling a modeler and a Plexi within 0.2dB, then play through a pair of studio monitors on a desk with IKEA legs and say “identical.” Yeah man, totally — the same way a candle and the sun are identical because they both emit light.
Let’s not forget their favorite phrase: “It’s all in the mix.”
Of course it is — because they can’t hear nuance outside of a frequency analyzer. Meanwhile, every experienced guitarist hears the feel difference the moment they palm mute or dig in. But sure, trust the guys who think a waveform overlay is more trustworthy than 30 years of playing experience.
Bottom line? If null testing is your religion, that’s fine — but don’t come for the rest of us like you’ve cracked the code of the universe. Tone isn’t a science fair project. It’s art. And art doesn’t null.
KingsXJJ
Rock Star
- Messages
- 2,897
And a null one at that.
Mikael Dez
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,238
My wife’s boyfriend taught me that null tests are for cucks and then he gave me his Kemper
2dor
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,436
Chocol8
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,531
They still have some used value, so nice score...well uh, nice new to you profiler I guess.
Mikael Dez
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,238
I have spent too much time on Reddit for my own good
Sascha Franck
Rock Star
- Messages
- 9,277
Well, it actually does. Not always in a meaningful way, but still. See the explanation of @2dor
This is pretty spot on.
AlbertA
Roadie
- Messages
- 700
Yeah but that's a subjective interpretation of the result. My original point is that the null residual by itself won't immediately tell you if its audible in context of the original signal, some due to the psychoacoustic masking effects.
It could be interesting to look into PEMO-Q metric in this context.
Sascha Franck
Rock Star
- Messages
- 9,277
Not really. If there's plenty of midrange sound coming through when the files are inverted, the mids are off from the original (it just needed some further exploration to find out which of the signals is doing what). And you'll likely be able to spot that kinda easily when playing the two as well.
What's that, if I may ask?
Sascha Franck
Rock Star
- Messages
- 9,277
Oh, just googled PEMO-Q. May have a look into it.
AlbertA
Roadie
- Messages
- 700
That's still a subjective evaluation of the residual signal is my point. That's fine of course - you are building an intuition about what the null test residuals mean for you, at which levels (overall or in respective frequency bands) you can hear a change or not - ie how they correlate to what you hear in terms of difference in the context of the actual full signal. How low do they have to be before you stop noticing a difference, all that sort of thing.
That's not unlike what people do when trying to characterize and correlate subjective interpretation of a difference into a quantitative metric (like the ones used on perceptual codecs like MP3, AAC, etc.
Last edited:
metropolis_4
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,051
I believe Ken Rockwell coined the term “Equipment Measurbator”
The risk of spending time analyzing null tests or pixel peeping test screen shots is making the transition from being an Artist/Musician to being an Equipment Measurbator.
https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm
The risk of spending time analyzing null tests or pixel peeping test screen shots is making the transition from being an Artist/Musician to being an Equipment Measurbator.
https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm
KingsXJJ
Rock Star
- Messages
- 2,897
Kind of like hanging out on forums and being a fan boy but with data. Yep.
metropolis_4
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,051
They’re about equal to me in terms of uselessness.
Just yesterday I had someone admiring a 20x30 print on my wall asking me “how did you capture that level of detail?”
I took it with a 30 year old Nikon AF 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 I bought for $35.
Some guy in a photography forum told me I must hate my family to take photos of them with such a cheap lens
Mikael Dez
Shredder
- Messages
- 2,238
Elitists ruin hobbies and fun every time
metropolis_4
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,051
ian_dissonance
Shredder
- Messages
- 1,379
I don’t know why it has to be so pedantic. When it comes to captures the “most null” means very little has changed from the original (there will always be some difference) and “less null” means it’s a Kemper. Not complicated.
metropolis_4
Rock Star
- Messages
- 4,051
Neither one means anything useful to me
If it does for you that’s great! Chase whatever works for you
