Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

@henry53 . And you have repeated the lie with different words. That is personal preference. That is not this discussion no matter how many times it is repeated.

Receiving criticism for saying that no measurements can tell you if you will like the 'sound'.  

 

@henry53 . The only thing that happened is some generalities were expressed about what people on average will prefer.  Many lies have been told about what was said. 

@fair 

https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_20_r.pdf (page 16 on)

A lot of trash in this collection of articles unfortunately. Interesting that you linked to the specific article on the power cube. They say in that article,

We do not perform such separ-
ate IM distortion tests here because they characterize the
same nonlinearities identified by the THD tests. A non-
linearity that gives rise to a high 20 kHz THD will also
cause inband distortion products in a multitone test. A
full-scale 20 kHz test has the advantage that it has the
maximum rate of change of any inband test signal and it
characterizes both even- and odd-order nonlinearities
[Borbely 1989], [Jung 1979]. Transient intermodulation
effects [Otala 1970] are also covered in this test.

I assume you agree with all that written above as well, or only what suits you? 

The article you link talks, often, about the performance of the current limiter inside the amplifier. If the amplifier is running into a current limit, it is clipping. If you are running your amplifier into clipping, then you are beyond the limits of the amplifier.

Note the only example they show of oscillation, the issue yielded by non-resistive tests, shows oscillation occurring at 2 ohms, 60 degrees, and 1 ohm 30 and 60 degrees. This is important as it relates back to this article on ASR you linked:

Complex Load for Power Amplifier torture testing

This specific issue is discussed, as they talk about how many speakers have both very low impedance and very large phase shift. The conclusion is very few. Hence why the consensus that resistive testing into low enough impedance is sufficient. Elsewhere there is a call to include 2 ohm testing which I think I have seen on some more recent tests.  It is probably important to identify from the articles linked that the worst issues are with tube amplifiers, lauded by audiophiles and rarely tested by ASR. When they are, the result is not positive.

The other threads you posted from ASR are primarily not technical discussions about testing, but more banter from what appears to be the less technical members. Not everyone on ASR is technical.

Also, quite a few replies there were redacted: one can see quotations from them and references to them, but not the original replies in their entirety.

If you are going to participate in a thread putting down a web site you should probably learn how that site works, or at least the "Click to expand" button. There is nothing redacted. The forum has a very good quote and reply system unlike another one I am thinking of.

 

Here we differ too. As technical as the dedicated ASR discussion thread was, it didn't touch on stochastic behavior of non-linear time-dependent systems, of which a practical multi-transducer loudspeaker is a prime example.

Attaching such a system to an approximately linear, approximately time-independent power amplifier leaves the combined system still non-linear and time-dependent.

The math describing non-linear time-dependent systems is far more sophisticated than the one underlying the simple measurements that Amir uses.

At first, that appears to be a lot to unpack. However, it can quickly be taken as a deflection. The topic at hand is the test of amplifiers. Specifically in this case resistive testing.

Attaching such a system to an approximately linear, approximately time-independent power amplifier

This negates all the other words used in the last paragraph. By your admission, the amplifier is time independent, approximately at least. That a speaker is not, is not relevant to the discussion. The only relevance would be if speakers drifted from a maximum of 30 degrees phase shift to 60 degree when they got hot and this is not identified in the ASR discussion linked. Is that what you are claiming? 

No I haven’t made any claim about Stereophile. I’ll give you some time to edit your post or reformulate your question and check a bit later.

Your deflection and lack of recognition of sites that both have paid advertising and receive gifts is noted @axo1989 , but it does not change the outcome. I will continue to wait for those youtube links.

[START BOOK]

I see it differently. Sure, we learned quite a bit since these articles were written. Yet, the time during which they were published marked presence of many amplifiers designers and manufacturers in North America. They knew what they were talking about.

It was a comment about how amplifier design and speaker design has progressed. To your point, we have learned a lot.

 

A typical “moving the goalposts” / “straw-man” rhetorical manipulation. That discussion of IM correlation with THD is still conducted in the context of the amp’s linearity under best conditions, not in the context of the linearity of system comprised of amp+speaker.

Pointing out that this whole discussion (not you specifically) seems to be about picking your facts, or what you think they are. I spent more time learning about the math today. One of the joys of being somewhat retired. I don't have the engineering chops, but I took more than a few nasty math courses on the way to my PhD. By testing down to 2 ohms, where only the rare speaker reaches, there is significant exploration of the vast majority of speakers impact on stability.

 

Current limiting occurs in amps without specific current limiting circuits too. As an example, a heating up power transformer coil may in effect serve as a current limiter. Another example is insufficiently sized capacitive power bank.

The article, nor I differentiated what was current limiting, however, I believe the two examples you gave are not. This comes back to the math above.  Some EE's could probably jump in on that.

 

Look at the curves of THD vs output power characteristics of amplifiers, and you’ll see that typically, there is a rise in THD (and by extension in IM) long before the amp clips. The degree of such deterioration is typically frequency-dependent too.

 

Even I know that is about how the amplifier is designed and feedback. The feedback goes down as the frequency goes up. Going back to the math I learned today, as the feedback goes down, the stability will improve.

 

This is indeed one of the mechanisms explaining the phenomenon of some of the amps distorting significantly more while they are connected to a speaker compared to when they are connected to a dummy resistive load.

 

I think you made that up. That does not make sense.

 

Yes, occurrences when a commercially sold amplifier becomes unstable and turns into a generator while connected to a specific speaker are rare. Even though, the thread referred below has a description of a surprisingly common-case instance of that.

If you mean tube amps, I noted that, and that ASR rarely tests them.

 

However, just like with the discussion of THD and IM, we need to take into account that the amp-speaker system can “ring” for some time, instead of turning into a self-supporting generator. Some of the replies in the thread below describe precisely such occurrences.

Which brings us back to the 99.9% of the time it does not happen. "Ring for some time"? You mean unstable. Again, even I know that. Perhaps you should not be the person trying to lecture me on this.

 

However, some of the replies highlight the fact that in some other  market segments, including that of affluent audiophiles, larger speakers employing exotic transducers and much more sophisticated crossovers are more prevalent, and thus the events of ringing and self-generation are much more probable.

 

This is conjecture on your part. Fortunately, we can test this theory as Stereophile tests a lot of expensive speakers. Wilson Alexx5? No issue. Sabrina? No problem. Sasha, Alexia? No problem. Magico, 4 models, worst was 3 ohm, -60 degrees, not extreme by PowerCube article. B&W 801 - no issues. Big Magnepan? Child's play.  Soundlab?  Normally fine, but you can make the Brightness control nasty. Infinity IRS, etc. not as bad as many make out to be. Saw a note that tube amplifiers were considered in their design.

I will stick with my 99.99% and that seems to extend well into audiophile speakers. The corollary is no amp vendor provides any detailed measurements and you are hoping you detect this fault in a listening test.

 

There is no such consensus in that discussion. Interested readers can go there and see for themselves. I would roughly split the multitude of members posted there onto three categories:

1. Designers and restorers of amps from Western countries. They are for comprehensive testing with non-purely-resistive loads.

Restorer John is the only "restorer" and he does not come across as technical as others. More a tinkerer.  As the conversation progressed as noted, the consensus (always detractors) was low resistance for sufficient for goals.

 

1. Designers of amps from China. They are for limited testing with non-purely-resistive loads.

All 1 of them?

 

1. Vendors selling amps made from pre-built blocks, Amir, and some of Amir’s followers. They maintain that testing on purely-resistive load is not ideal, yet good enough for predicting amp’s performance in 99.99% of cases.

By far the most popular being Bruno Putzey designs and B&O. Nice thing given these are modules, they only need to be tested once to cover all units that will use them. 

 

Behavior of most amplifiers, including tube ones, does depend on the value of purely-resistive load, yet the change in behavior is much more predictable with the change in just the resistance value.

That is not a logical sentence.

 

Thus, while testing on 2 ohm has its merit, it appears from the discussion that testing on non-purely-resistive loads is of more interest to people with practical experience in designing and repairing amps.

 

I went back and saw that only one designer felt very strongly about it and he designed car audio amplifiers. That is not surprising given what car audio people will connect.  Going back to the math I learned today, if the designer knows the transfer function, they can estimate with high probability if the amp will be unstable.  You may want to read this:

https://d1.amobbs.com/bbs_upload782111/files_28/ourdev_548669.pdf

I had to read it 3 times, but this is very interesting too.
https://linearaudio.net/sites/linearaudio.net/files/volume1bp.pdf     That pokes holes in all the so called arguments about feedback.

 

Unless a member is an unscrupulous dealer pushing some version of snake oil, most of the “banter” deserves consideration, in my opinion. I give full credit to Amir for filtering out vast majority of such snake oil salesmen. However, the story doesn’t end there.

No it does not, no more than the banter on "medicine" by people with limited knowledge of what they are talking about. It is akin to people here talking about feedback, even a 100 of them, compared to Bruno and his article.

 

Similarly to doctors giving zero credence to patients describing their symptoms, and only relying on the results of locally available objective tests, amp designers and restorers only relying on simple measurements aren’t likely to keep their clientele for long.

Good marketing often wins over good product, and audio is no different. The first thing doctors often, if not normally do after hearing about the symptoms is to run tests. However, unlike audio, where only the external presentation matters, the patient describing symptoms are often the only measurements we may have of what is happening internally.  The issue presents not when the patient describes their symptoms, but when the patient tries to force their diagnosis on the doctor, even when the tests indicate otherwise. The test is almost always correct. The listening part criticality is to ensure there are not multiple issues at play. The communication part is letting the patient think they had influence when they had none.

 

Ignoring your not so subtle attempt of slighting me, a person whom you obviously don’t know much about.

Once again, interested readers can go there and see for themselves. They’ll find the traces of reductions exactly as I described them.

I will use this definition of redacted as I think it is appropriate:

to edit (text) so as to remove or hide confidential or sensitive information:

There is no evidence of this. When someone quotes another poster, it is normal, as one would also do here, to cut out what the replyer considers extraneous content w.r.t. their reply. That is not redacting, that is editing.  I have not seen nor experienced ASR "redact" anything, though they will suggest less harsh language.

 

Indeed, ASR runs on a more modern discussion platform than Audiogon. The “reply system” in practice also includes so-called moderation subsystem, or, in simpler terms, censorship features.

All forums, with few exceptions, have moderation, including this one. If you label ASR censorship, then you have to label all others.

 

Yet a discussion site with overreaching moderation generates its share of issues, both for regular members and site owners. I maintain that the ASR moderation has been such since about 2021.

I only passively use ASR these days, so I will not comment on this. That was not my experience as of 2 years ago when I was still active, though I did find it at times toxic. I think alternate means, i.e. a sand-box for people who don't fit in would be more appropriate. However, I go back to my comment, that many of the commenters here would effectively be flat earth followers on a science site given what they write. Hence, I am not surprised by how ASR treated them and I don't think it is unwarranted.

 

Nope, topic at hand is relevance of the testing Amir does on specifically power amplifiers to the subjective perception of audible distortions contributed by amp A vs amp B when connected to a specific speaker.

Except we come back to 99.9% or more of amplifier / speaker combinations will not have stability problems, ASR does not test tube amplifiers often, and based on my research, however, limited, that even audiophile speakers do not commonly have extreme characteristics, then there will be no change, at the amplifier level, with almost all speakers.

 

My position, as is the position of majority of ASR members with practical experience in designing and repairing power amplifiers who cared to express their opinions, is that the testing Amir has been conducting is marketed as more definitive than it shall be based on scientific understanding of the limited nature of the tests.

I will only state that you have no provided any concrete examples of where this is the case, not even strong potential examples, though I have accepted tube amplifiers could be most at risk here.

 

OK, let me give you another analogy. Imagine if we assigned championship titles in boxing based on tests involving a boxer and a punching bag.

The geometry of the bag and the rope it is suspended on would now influence the system dynamics stronger. An audiophile analogy would be thermally induced deviations of the load resistance value, and parasitic capacitance of the cable leading to the resistive load.

Thermally induced variations in the load have no impact on the amplifier performance as you admitted it is effectively time invariant. Cable capacitance is very low, and with the rare exception, far in the past (was that Naim) has not been a real issue. One could argue there is no reason to have that low of capacitance.

 

The goal of the boxer remains the same: the center of the mass of the bag he is punching must exhibit a specific pattern of acceleration. Only now the bag is also pushed and pulled by other swinging bags via the springs and the ropes threaded through friction pads and pulleys. This is analogous to how an amp must work when attached to a practical speaker.

 

You are pushing me out of my comfort zone, but I will respond with what I know, what I read, and my newfound knowledge of the math of stability and feedback. Looks like those math courses were not single minded!  I read in one technical article that the electrical simulation models using resistors, inductors, and capacitors are both realistic and valid models of real speakers including the movement of the cones.  As these are all linear elements, at least for the purposes of our discussion, then they can be simplified to magnitude and phase.  Hence we are right back to our stability discussion and 99.9% it does not matter. Audiophiles may be interested. It does not mean their interest is relevant.

 

Indeed, thermal drift of a transducer coil resistance value due, to ,say, a loud music passage, is a factor that a good amplifier must somehow compensate for. Yet even if we remove the friction pads in the system of bags described above, its behavior will remain pretty sophisticated, and very different from a behavior of a single heavy punching bag.

This is not the purpose of the amplifier. How would it know it was the transducer coil, and not some other element.  This would be the job of the speaker designer to compensate for.

 

One of the cases is simply running our of amp’s power supply current capacity. A music passage may be such that at some point all the bags will be moving towards the boxer, overwhelming him with the combined impulse.

Testing power output at different frequencies and 8,4,2 ohms would cover your argument. Again, even I know what. Using a reactive load that is not the same as your speaker is not going to provide easy guidance.

 

This type of deficient behavior may be exhibited on some music passages by certain class A, A/B, and especially class D amplifiers, with their open loop bandwidth insufficient to deal with such combination of the speaker and music passage.

I feel this statement is made up. I don't think it based in theory or reality.

 

Audibly, such deficiency may manifest itself as a lack of transparency, and timing errors, especially in music produced by dozens of instruments playing at once.

But we go back to testing at 2,4,8 ohms, which is sufficient for 99.9% or more of speakers will provide all information needed on where the amplifier will clip, and testing with a reactive load will provide no additional information. How would you even related it to your speaker that you intend to use?

[END BOOK]

 

This is just me, learning as I am going, finding it easy to counter your arguments, some of which I have a high confidence are flawed.

 

He obviously has a defective ear(s)/brain, really bad audio equipment/cables/system or listening capability. 

 

That is 4 cliches in one sentence. That is not something one should be proud of.

@cd318 , I honestly appreciate the comment. Perhaps some who are reading this mess will take it to heart. Quite evident, many will not. Some will even resort to inventing a fantasy life in order to feel superior though I cannot fathom what end goal they have in mind? Everyone seems to feel they have to be in a "camp" these days, even if it is not in their best interests, or anyone else’s for that matter. We used to hold everyone to account, now people just pick a side and turn off part of their brain.

@nonoise ,

 

I expect that what I see here is what many others will see while reading these sorry pages. A calm, experienced, knowledgeable, detail oriented, expert in this particular aspect of his field professional who is going up against a bunch of classroom bullies who are doing their attempted best at a character assassination.

 

Keeping patting yourself on the back every time you think you have a gotcha. It is pretty obvious you don't and you are either twisting Amir's words deceitfully or do not understand most of them. I think it is a combination of both. I will say this again in the hopes it sinks in. You should be ashamed of your behaviour. This may be an internet forum, but it is still real life. You are not in some video games where everything resets when you lose a life.

@russ69 I think you misinterpret what @amir_asr is communicating. Amir has talked about what most people like. There seems to be some merit to that. A lot of us like a good Cabernet, but some like it drier and some like it with a bit of residual sugar. If you tell me it is super dry like an Arizona desert in the summer, and Amir's test equipment says no, it is quite sweet, with a specific number that represents sweeter than 50% of all Cabernets, who is right?   (The correct answer is Amir).

@dducat ,

Aside from going to war with some very reputable equipment makers, people who are directly accountable vs. a faceless brand of high-end gear and Amir and his minions claim a wide variety of skills and capabilities but literally don't know what they're measuring, how they're measuring it / how to use the tools they have and what their measurements actually mean.

 

Perhaps you would like to expand on who these companies are that ASR went to war over? Do you mean GR Research?   You claim that ASR does not know what to measure, how to use their equipment, or how to interpret the results. Then you make a comment about a single speaker and an anechoic chamber.  If you are going to jump in on this character assassination, shouldn't you know what you are saying?  It took me about 5 minutes of reading the first speaker review on ASR to know they don't use an anechoic chamber. They do not need one. It took maybe 10 minutes to understand why Amir uses a single speaker. Perhaps if you ask him he will tell you.

 

This is not adult banter @nonoise , this is an out and out attempted character assassination. It is not done in jest.

@westcoastaudiophile , I am disappointed you are insisting I do this. Do you truly believe you have not been making derogatory comments?  I am not the only person who will see these following comments as derogatory.

 

Medical Doctor is not an arts or science degree, it is a medical degree. In almost all jurisdictions in the world, the Faculty of Medicine will be fully independent from other Faculties. The general consensus in the medical community is that M.D. is an applied science degree. Due to the highly competitive nature, many doctors today also have a PhD in some aspect of medical science. The strongest links between medical faculties and other faculties is of course science.

@kota1

 

Unless there have been some changes in the Audiogon management, which I am not aware of, you are not a member of staff. However, here you are with 111 posts, about 1/2 of them on this topic, acting like you set the rules and were elected leader of the club. You do appear to have elected yourself moderator of this topic.

 

This was your second post ever, attacking Amir. Given your attitude that you "own the place", should I assume you are new "former" account?

"Science" is published in peer reviewed journals. The guy at ASR is asking for money in every review and states upfront that he is a dealer and you can assume as much bias as you like. He can't even properly listen to components because he states proudly he doesn't like room treatments. It is worse than a joke because he has duped people into something like a cult of measurements.

@laoman , assume I know nothing about wine and explain to me, in as much detail as necessary, why my analogy shows I know nothing about wine.

 

@kota1 , are you working from the perspective that if you tell a lie enough times it will become true?  Amir has been considerably more professional than those attacking him here.

 

@fleschler, I learned something about CDs today when I tried to find your posts on ASR. Unlike a record where the grooves may not be concentric with the center hole, the CD manufacturing process ensures the tight alignment of the hole and the grooves. While learning, I also saw someone note that if we can read CDs at 30-40x reliably, that reading at 1x is trivial. I also learned that even early CD players had data buffers, which in retrospect is obvious, but I never gave it much thought. What am I getting at?  The informed reaction to a device that shaves the outside of a CD should be skepticism. It would be very easy to test whether it makes a difference. I expect Amir's equipment would do this easily. 

 

@whipsaw , I agree and do not agree with some of your statement. I do agree that many users on ASR appear to equate perfect measurements with idealized sound for an individual. I do agree that is a flawed position. I do not know how strongly Amir believes in that position and I will not put words in his mouth as others are doing. I do know from reading these pages that Amir's comments have centered on whether audio products do what they say they do, including whether they do or can sound different from another product. Amir is stating based on his measurements that many products must sound the same or that they do not do what they claim. I think that is the more contentious issue. The issue of accuracy and preference is peripheral to the discussion.

@tsushima1  The emotionally driven childish writings of far too many people in these 750+ posts is more than enough evidence to justify my decision. If it was just me I probably would not care at this point, but this will be yet another lesson on dealing with people for my grandson.

 

What are you going on about convictions? Convictions are whether I think we should be properly funding health care so that everyone can have some acceptable level of basic care. This is not a discussion about convictions. This is a combination of acting like adults, and the validity of personal observation. It is not even about whether good measurements mean good sound. That is a lie that some keep repeating for reasons I can only assume are nefarious.

 

@tonywinga you have for all intents and purposes said you are not honest with yourself. Every day our brain presents us with ideas that are not true. Many have inflated view of aspects of themselves, while having deflated views of other aspects. Our brain lies to us all the time. But this time, this time while listening to audio, it is 100% fallible? 

@fleschler ,

It should not take more than a few minutes of reading the ASR site to understand that reporting listening experiences goes over like a lead ballon unless you have approached that listening experience in a somewhat scientific fashion. Where the product should naturally be met with skepticism, I would expect that goes double. It is right in the name. Audio Science Review. I believe you believe there was an audible difference. Audio Science Review does not work that way. My belief, your belief? It means nothing there. You have very strong opinions obviously about CD players. They will not take your strong opinions as anything other than opinions. However, if you were to ship Amir two CD players, especially a modified and unmodified version, he probably would, purely out of interest, test the two of them and provide a detailed report on whether there is any difference in the performance and yes, he would make conclusions on whether those differences, if any, are audible. If you set out to do a scientifically valid listening test of these two units, or something close, I am sure Amir, would help you with that process. I would still expect some skepticism of the results, that is normal for any scientific pursuit.

 

Anywhere where personal beliefs and experience are put up against science, there is conflict. Religion and science, diet and science, cures for sickness and science, the shape of the earth and science.

 

I am extremely upset with character assassination, defamation, perverted twisting of neutral statements/personal experiences which degrade the person stating them and the statement. That’s what he has now done on Audiogon.

 

The last many pages of this thread have been a full on attempted character assassination of Amir, complete with defamation, libel, degrading statements, and twisted words. If his ire is up, I am not at all surprised. You are going to consider anyone who questions your relating of personal experiences are derogatory. I don’t see people in the science side of audio ever not questioning the validity of personal experience reports. It is no different in other scientific pursuits like health and medicine. Like health and medicine, when enough personal experience reports correlate, someone normally does a study under controlled conditions, the results are published, and the most often case is no correlation is found. Sometimes there is. I don’t perceive audio is any different.

 

@russ69 ,

There is no need to exclude other opinions nor any reason to provide measurements to back that opinion up. I guess the thing that bugs me is some think I need to provide documentation of my opinions. I most certainly do not need to prove anything to others.

 

Amir has been quite clear. If you want to participate on his forum, then you do need to provide documentation, and preferably measurements. Is not this whole topic because some do not accept that?

@teo_audio ,

Science says that 'observation is king', where engineering says 'the laws of physics are king'. One can move us forward, one can make things in this world. Maybe one has no importance that is greater than the other, they both being parts of the modern structure of life, if you will.

I may not know everything about audio, but I know a lot about science in general and how it works. I also have pretty good reading comprehension and I am not prone to letting my emotions cloud my judgment or interpretations.

Amir has stated, many times, and effectively for those that either understand what he is saying or care to understand what he is saying, that "observation is king". You could have saved yourself a lot of typing, or a filibuster as @ghasley described it.

The difference is Amir is using the scientific definition of observation, where you, on the basis of writing a very long post that I assume is to refute Amir, are not using the scientific definition of observation though you believe you are. I changed X to Y and it sounded better is not scientific observation. I expect more often than not, when someone changes from X to Y expecting an improvement that they hear an improvement. That is called correlation, but is the causation because Y sounds better, or is the causation the psychology of the purchase?  When scientists observe cause and effect, the most critical thing they do is isolate for the variable they are intending to measure.  When Amir talks about listening, he does the same.  That is scientific observation.  In my former field, which you can perhaps guess by reading my posts, scientific observation was king even though you would be inundated on a daily basis with personal observations.

 

@fleschler , I don’t see any reason to continue in a tit for tat with you as your posts, to me, appear to be driven more by emotion than careful consideration.

You said this,

@crymeanaudioriver You LIE just like Amir. You know very well as I clearly stated how he took a neutral statement about someone’s preferred music and pervertedly twisted it into a negative character comment which I DO NOT DO.

And you also said this:

 

They often state that if something scientifically measures better, then it sounds better. They give no credence to unmeasurable sound factors like PRAT and Ambiance. Some of the posters music choices range from rap to hip hop and anything pop oriented created in the past from 1995.

 

The point of your post was to complain about ASR and also to complain about ASR participants, and the only thing you mentioned about their music tastes is what I highlighted, then I see no way in which that statement could be considered neutral. To me, and likely to others, it implies that those that listen to that type of music could not possibly be critical listeners.

 

You called me a liar, however, I will point out you also said this,

It is apparent that they don’t listen to music and the music they listen to is so bereft of acoustic information that they couldn’t judge on their cheap equipment what it could sound like.

 

Do you still want to insist your comment was neutral? You also wrote this:

 

@orgillian197 Same here as I noted. Between the ASR posters preferred music choices, state of their hearing and immutable belief in cheap, good measuring equipment, our hearing is quite different.

 

 

 

@fleschler 

 

"None of those changes is massive but, with even average human hearing having a 100 decibel range from the lowest sound we can hear to the loudest sound we can bear without injury, our ears have a single-scale resolution range of 1 to 1 BILLION—far greater than any known test instrument—so even differences that might seem prohibitively small may be clearly audible."

 

Point 1:  I encourage you to learn enough about audio, science, or math to check the potential validity of what you wrote.  Point 2:  When I have the music turned up loud and I am engrossed in the music, my wife needs to shout to get my attention. I just quickly Googled that normal talking is about 60db. That means I am struggling to hear 60db. Hopefully that means something to you as it relates to what you wrote.

 

Perhaps it is my background in a science related field, but I find these concepts rather simple to understand, but without that understanding, I could see myself susceptible to believing things that are not true. Couple that with a belief you have nothing to learn and you become susceptible to both external suggestion and internal misdirection.

 

Good for him but Darko uses different measurements and often reveals different answers. Choices and variable methods to conduct experiments occur in measurements.

I looked through Darko's site. It was obviously not the first time I was there. I failed to find one measurement except in his discussion of bass decay. Are you referring to his ears as measurement devices?

 

@laoman ,

Regarding Amir’s comments here. Frankly I find them offensive. He has come along with the attitude of "Let me educate you." I do not need him or anyone else to educate me on what I like and dislike. Nor to I need to be lectured that I do not understand the Science. There are many people far more experienced and qualified than Amir of whom I prefer to take note.

 

Can you tell us these people who are far more experienced and qualified? I am serious, I would appreciate a list.

 

I don't think Amir is at all lecturing anyone on what they like or don't like. That would be obtuse and Amir does not appear to be obtuse. Do you need to be lectured on the science?  To enjoy music? No.  To continue to contribute in a valuable fashion on audio forums without being incensed by what others have written and misquoting what they have said?  I think for many on this forum, that should be self evident. For many, when they read something on a forum that does not agree with their world view their first inclination is to think, "you are wrong, wrong, wrong". Maybe we all do that. It is the next step that defines you. You can get on that forum and say you are wrong, wrong wrong, and likely be the one that is wrong, or you can open up Google, and start learning. Proving yourself wrong is much less contentious than someone else doing it, and it is ultimately more satisfying.

 

@chopandchange , your post is nothing but insult attempting to look like high reasoning and deep insight. It is a tired trope and best left inside your head and not put on a forum. I could as easily say that the posters on this forum are incensed with Amir because he has shown, with hard to refute measurements, that you can achieve perfect recreation of an audio signal with a Topping DAC and a £500 amplifier.

I do not comprehend the analogy of listening loud and shouting at low volume levels. I am certainly not a genius but have 2 BAs, JD, MPA etc and took physics courses at UCLA. My wife was a bio-chem major at Stoneybrook and has very deep comprehension of mathematics. We are not uneducated "noobs."

 

I have not claimed to be an arbiter of all things audio, or for almost anything audio. You have assigned that job to yourself.  That you don't understand the analogy of listening to loud music and not being able to hear regular conversation, in the context of your post, is not surprising. Being educated does not mean that you are applying your intelligence all the time. You made two comments about the dynamic range of hearing. One from my knowledge is accurate, maybe even a low estimate. The other was ludicrous. That you do not understand my comment means you do not know how to temper the information you believe you know about hearing with the act of listening to music.

 

I previously commented there are two paths to take with information. I said when that information conflicts with what we believe, but it also applies when that information supports what we believe. We can reject that information without consideration, even becoming angry, we can accept that information, even without knowing if accurate or valid, or we can research and learn further and try to understand the nature of that data. If the data supports what you already believe, you may tend towards confirmation sources that believe the same thing, however unqualified.

 

You put down Amir because he is saying things you do not want to believe, meanwhile lauding Darko who is saying what you want to believe. There is no doubt at all in my mind, that where this topic is concerned, Amir is far more knowledgeable and would be far more recognized as an expert by others with real expertise. 

There are a lot of put downs of engineers on audio forums. My background is medicine/medical research. I am very familiar with this mindset from lay people. Curiously, I almost never ran into that mindset from people who worked in unrelated science fields. It was unique to those who worked outside the sciences. Not exclusively, but the majority. Perhaps those who work in the sciences have better training to identify likely correct information from likely incorrect information? They are absolutely skeptical people, but they temper that skepticism with research.

 

@td_dayton ,

 

My background is medicine/medical research. Fortunately, or unfortunately, at a biological level we are all rather similar. If we were not, medicine, disease, injuries, would be an even harsher problem to attack. Our preferences will obviously have a combination of genetic, environmental, and experience aspect. That is not controversial. That genetic aspect is driven by evolution and while there are variances, there also strong underlying similarities. We see that in all aspects of sensory stimulus, whether sound, site, smell, or taste.  That is why companies like Walmart pick their color schemes as they are, why food products with multiple flavors always have favorites, why we prefer yellowy light when it is dim, why we like the feeling of soft/plush textures.

Our similarities are even more similar at the hardware level. It is surprising how little variation, when we are young and everything is in tip top condition, there is. That applies to site, hearing, taste, even touch. The resolution, sensitivity, and dynamic range of all our senses varies only by small amounts within a population. Some are gifted with better processing capability and the ability to extract more useful information, but they have similar underlying limitations.

@russ69  how many times will you and others repeat this lie?  It does not suddenly become true just because you repeat it.

 

They have one mantra: If it's not measured, it's BS. Totally ignoring the scientific area of observation.

 

 

I see @cd318 also called you on this. Maybe it will sink it.

 

@rockrider 

 

Speaking for myself, I cannot accept the first statement because “make sense at an engineering level” is too limited. I firmly believe our current state of knowledge cannot fully describe the sound quality that will result from a given system/room. 

 

If a power conditioner has no effect on the output, or a USB cable has no effect on the output as Amir had shown in tests, then how could the sound of the system / room possibly change?  If you refute the accuracy of Amirs tests, do you have any basis for that?

 

I see your post and many here either anti science or anti authority. I am not sure which.  A comment was made that people here are people of means. People of means often have issues with people in positions of authority putting limits on them. Amir is effectively in a position of authority and is putting virtual limits on what audiophiles can claim without repercussion. Maybe that is what mosy irks many of the posters here

@laoman 

 

Why would I thank you for pontificating about things I already knew intimately. You made a commemt about me not understanding wine, but unfortunately the only lack of understanding was yours about my post. There was nothing inaccurate about wine in my post.

 

W.r.t. experts, maybe instead of putting down Amir and ASR you should read more and judge less. When I participated there there were people who were recognized experts in their field. I remember one especially JJ, who I understand is one of the top experts in the world in psychoacoustics, perceptual coding, and spatial audio.  People who one can look up and see 10's of research articles in journals not consumer magazines. A foremost amplifier design expert who I understand is one of the most referenced experts in the field.  These are the people who are happy to be associated with ASR.

For the record @laoman , in my first post I commented that I found the ASR mood at time toxic. However I don't see the blatant repeated lies masquerading as arguments I see in this topic.

 

I am in no position of authority to question Amir's testing methods other than wrt general scientific rigor. I know you are certainly not in a position to question his methods. I would hazard a guess that the members of ASR are far far more qualified to question his methods than people here. Far more. There are threads on test methods on ASR and what could be improved. However, complain as you will, many manufacturers respect his results. With all the qualified people that participate in ASR, and accept the results, it is arrogance on your unqualified part to be sniping about his methods.

Hi my name's Dave and I have a degree in accounting and I have an expensive system cause I am rich. How dare those engineers who have spent their life learning about a topic I know almost nothing about tell me that what I believe is impossible!!  Well hey my name's Ralph and I am a musician and failed high school physics. I know how you feel. I know how things sound. How dare they tell me what I believe is impossible.

********************

 

I am not an engineer. When not one, not two, but every engineer who is not trying to sell me something tells me what I believe is not possible i have the humility to consider I am wrong. Not just consider, but will assume I am wrong till I prove otherwise.

 

That does not mean I lack creative thinking , or an open mind, or trust in myself, or a resolving enough system whatever that means. It means I have common sense and don't let my ego rule my behavior.

 

********

@prof I appreciate your posts and views. Thank you.  @rtorchia similar.

 

@laoman  you twisted Amir's words over and over. It was poor behavior. If you got any snark you deserved it.  Many of you twisted Amir's word if not outright lied about what he said. I am embarrassed for the lot of you.

.

 

@juanmanuelfangioii  what's up with the attempts to censor?

@prof 

 

You seem very reasonable. Read @laoman  's posts and tell me if I am off base.

 

@laoman all you have done is thrown insults. Amir was rather cordial when he first came on this topic. Neither he nor anyone should have to put up with the lies and abuse that you and others delivered. You twisted his words. You claimed he said things he did not. You called him a liar without justification.

 

@laoman you also made made a snarky comment about my wine knowledge based on a post I wrote but have not in any way shown what I wrote was incorrect. You made a similar comment about my audio knowledge, though I have never claimed to be an expert, yet you have provided no support that anything I have said is incorrect.  If this is how you behave why would you expect respectful behavior from others?

I see you have nothing to add but cheap insults @ghasley?

 

The rejection of science here is akin to fanaticism.

 

 

 

1) Failure to understand Klippel measurements

Are you referring to Danny Ritchie claiming this? It took 5 minutes to find engineers taking apart Danny for his lack of knowledge of how Klippel works.  If you mean his Magnepan test I cannot comment and neither has Magnepan.

 

2) Poor testing methodology - eg the tests conducted on the Chord M Scaler

Poor how? The unit does not so anything when connected to a half decent DAC. It's output is very jittery.

 

3) Failure to read user manuals about tolerances before engaging in testing

Tolerances of what? You are really reaching here.

 

4) Testing cables for interference when they are not plugged in to anything

 

Took me a bit longer to understand this, but your comment is false. He tested unconnected to examine shielding and then connected it.

 

5) Not checking if the samples sent are "cherry picked"

In this topic Amir stated that most of what he tests comes from listeners.

 

6) A refusal to take responsibility for recommendations when the product quality is not satisfactory eg Topping.

 

You have both made up a failure rate for topping and no review site does. This is a ludicrous attempt to discredit.

 

7) Conducting speaker listening tests based on 1 speaker only ( I do not care what he says about the validity of this, as this is nonsense)

 

It is not that you don't care it is that you are not qualified to make this comment. I read the paper posted. Makes total sense.

 

8) Reliance on Sinad rather than use industry standard "THD" and "S/N ratio when this an old and arguably inefficient method of measurement.

 

Flat out incorrect. Have you even read any review on ASR? There are pages of measurements. IMD, SINAD, THD. Many different test levels and frequencies.

 

9) Listening at ridiculously high volumes eg on the Focal Clear headphones at 115 db. Are you serious??

 

Another flat out misrepresentation. Did you even read the review?

 

10) The farcical review of HiFiMan Ananda headphones where he was simply way off beam.

 

Farcical how? Do you own it and he disagrees?

 

 

@laoman I will give you the benefit of the doubt  that most of this list is not your own.  It was not hard, even at my knowledge level to tear apart your list.

 

@moto_man  you started fine then rejected science. You can pick and choose what you believe but that is the point where you transition from science to belief.  ASR people don't reject listening as a method they reject personal accounts listening accounts.  The science side has done many many blind listening tests, documented so they can be repeated, that have explored the limits of hearing. ASR does nothing but accept that science absent any well controlled studies that prove otherwise.  They inherently are not the people to prove otherwise in a controlled listening test as they are biased. The people here are. Ideally the best situation is the people from ASR running the test and the people from Audiogon being participants. One group will come away right. I have little doubt the ASR crowd would participate. Would the people from here participate?

@prof  , people here have shown their underlying nature. I am sure others reading this will understand and accept your well thought out posts even if those you target do not. Most will see that your basic logic is sound and what you are being met with is emotion not logic or clear thinking. 

 

If people are not willing to accept the most basic, irrefutably obvious premise that their senses are inherently fallible, then there is no hope for an intelligent conversation. It is impossible no matter how hard we try.

You do know that these measurements came about from observation first, the measurements didn’t come before observation. The science will never further if the measurements stay in stagnation, the ear/brain is more complex than the standard measurements we use for audio.

 

Did you read what I wrote? Scientists continue to do testing on human hearing to explore limits but those limits change at most now by very small amounts. Scientists are doing that. Audio companies make claims with no basis. It is quite a different process.

 

You have a belief that our ear and brain have a complexity that cannot be tested by current measurements. That is your belief. I do not see Amir disputing that for speakers. Do you? He does and it appears almost all on the scientific side dispute that for many products such as the oft hated cables (accurately most cables). No one has proven them wrong that I can tell. Lots of beliefs but no proof.

 

If you REALLY care about "learning what is going on" it may indeed entail that real audible differences are occurring in your cables.

 

I absolutely am open to the possibility. However, without any valid proof, not belief, but proof, I will err on the side of what has been proven. I used to be convinced of the same thing people hear believe till I was "forced" to accept otherwise. I don’t think any of the detractors here have ever truly tested their beliefs. How can you claim to have strong convictions if you are unwilling to test them?

 

There does seem to be consensus on the engineering side that some cables can have audible effects. I don’t see black and white, but nuanced reasoned positions. I am not seeing that from competing beliefs.

@prof note my quote above from Carl Jung. Nothing more to add at this point.

@axo1989  in audio we are well beyond the observation and hypothesis stage. However you are wrong or at least simplifying. The hypothethis may be as simple as you are hearing things. The scientific side of audio has already stated that and tested it often. The I believe my hearing crowd simply refuses to test their hypothesis that what they hear actually is there. Hence it remains a hypothesis for them and them alone.   Unfortunately based on a available evidence even if proven they don't hear what they think they hear I don't think they will accept the results. See my Carl Jung quote.

@juanmanuelfangioii has most advocated for censorship on these pages. The only one who spoke out against him is @prof and I. Others were very upset Amir was here. It seems censorship was just fine when it was censorship of those who disagreed.

 

I will put it in perspective so that some here can understand. There is an earth sciences site and astrophysics site. A flat earth believer goes to that site and claims the earth is flat. His evidence? His eyes clearly show it is flat. The members ask for more evidence. He provides none and keeps insisting his eyes don’t lie. They quickly turf him. Many of you who got turfed at ASR were flat earth followers visiting a science site. What did you expect?   This has nothing to do with free speech.

I don't know your backstory @cd318 mine is in the sciences. I fully admit I went through the same as you did. I probably spent a small fortune on audio magazines, tried all the tricks, etc.   I don't consider it a sign of weakness to admit I was mistaken. Is that why some are so ardent that they will not even challenge their own beliefs. They don't want to admit weakness?  Perhaps I could have related to it when I was younger, but today it is very foreign to me. It's a conscious decision to not grow.

Anyone telling you an audio product sounds bad based solely on a THD of 0.003% compared to another product with 0.001% without even listening as to whether that has any effect is delusional. 

 

Are you implying that happens on ASR @henry53 ??  Haven't we had enough hyperbole and lying for one topic already?

But "at best" they are informative descriptions of the sonic characteristics of the devices reviewed.

 

How do you know they are that and not a reflection of a very nice or very poor aesthetic, or prior conditioning, or the ongoing fight with the spouse?

@fair  -- All that typing, and all that work, but not even a minute of research to understand why a resistive load is used for amplifier testing.  It took me a bit longer to understand this item. I think I spent almost 30 minutes, but now I am comfortable with the answer. I also know now that everyone uses resistors for testing including Stereophile. Stereophile has a simulated speaker load, but this measurement provides no additional information that cannot be ascertained in other measurements. I quickly found at least 6 and probably there are many more discussions on using complex loads for amplifier testing on ASR. I had to Google to understand some of the terms, but I muddled through. Even the stronger proponents of complex load testing, after the discussion progressed, agreed it was of limited and would only be valuable with an extreme speaker and a marginal amplifier.  

I thank you for encouraging me to look into this as I sort of understood it, but had not delved deep enough. It was a less complex topic than I was expecting.

Even the stronger proponents of complex load testing, after the discussion progressed, agreed it was of limited and would only be valuable with an extreme speaker and a marginal amplifier.  

 

The Scintilla, would be a very rare speaker to encounter. The above statement covers this situation. Negating the value of measurements because they only apply in 99.99% of situations is a fools outcome.

@russ69 , please do list them. I am curious. The Scintilla seems unique.

@invalid , my limited understanding suggests that being mostly resistive, this will be less trouble?  You would need a lot of current to get volume I assume.

 

@cd318 , @noske , there is almost a perverse need to prove ASR wrong, which I expect will be a tough hill as there are a lot of loud technical people on that forum. That does not mean they are perfect, but far more predominantly right than wrong. Stereophile and others are brought up, but I have never seen the sophistication of measurement, the diversity, or the apparent level of equipment from any of these other sources. That is doubly so for speakers.  If most of the detractors spent 1/4 the time trying to understand the information that ASR puts forth as opposed to all the time they spend listening to apparently other unqualified detractors, they would advance their knowledge. Some things I have seen written on ASR were not obvious to me. I recognized my lack of knowledge and tried to learn as opposed to dismissing due to my own failings. That is the only way to grow.

Tastes are individual, fair enough, but their midrange suckout would surely show up on any frequency measurement chart as a huge problem if you were seeking accuracy.

It did leave me wondering a little just how such speakers get so many respectable reviews.

 

Is this not the same condition with photographs, or movies, or food, or wine.  One can emphasize a particular quality, and by emphasizing that quality, or flavor, the person experiencing it will have a heightened experience which will be perceived as superior. A complex and well balanced oak taste to a wine can hide the fact that it is lacking complexity of other flavors. If you like oak, which many do, you may be enamored and not catch what is missing.  Obviously good tasters will catch that, there are far more tasters and reviewers than there are good tasters and reviewers.

 

 

@russ69 Maybe 85%-90% sounds right.  There are many lower efficiency, low impedance, high phase angle speakers but so many more are easy to drive (horn loaded, Tannoy's, etc.) with only one set of difficult parameters (e.g. Harbeth's-low efficiency, nominal easy impedances, my Legacys with high efficiency, lower impedances).  The Apogees and MBL speakers are anomalies whereas common Maggies just need power).

 

Reading far more knowledgeable people on this topic, my 99.99% is much closer to the truth than 85% - 90%. I don't think it is a good idea to attempt to speak knowledgeably on a topic one is significantly deficient in. One of the forums topics I read commented that there are almost no speakers that dip below 2 ohms impedance. The Scintilla and one other as noticeable exceptions. That is only 2 out of 10's of thousands of speakers. They did not seem overly concerned with phase angle either, noting only that it would come with a loss of potential volume. I understand the math presented, though I may miss a nuance here and there.

I expect I travel in a much wider circle than you do. You may note my sideline in my first post and I don’t go chasing cheap. With my newfound knowledge:

Magnepan Tympani - Not hard to drive, though tube amps would struggle and older SS gear may.

901 - Does not tax a good modern receiver. Perhaps when they first came out it was an issue. ASR does not test 1970s SS gear.

IRS - Challenging in its time, but ASR does test amplifiers down to 2 ohms now, and that would be sufficient for the IRS

Plumbing the depths of what are at this point ancient speakers while not recognizing what tests are done does not prove your point. It reinforces my point that the goal here seems to be to find the one obscure situation where ASR measurements may not be correct, and attempt to use that as an excuse to discard all the work they do. Maybe that fools some people.

 

So you are saying Stereophile receives gifts @axo1989 ? Virtually every review site seems to get them. Unless he is selling them on Ebay or similar, calling it a gift is really an extreme stretch in an attempt to discredit.

 

I think you should post links to these supposed Youtube videos as the only one I could find was a "coached" video, 4 years old, when he was getting a new model of analyzer. You really are stretching to discredit.

 

Formal training? I did a lot of medical research. Formal training on equipment? I expect it is no different from the Audio Precision. An afternoon or maybe a day with the vendor. This is not something you go to school for.  Life saving hospital equipment was a different matter, but equipment used in research?  Just another sloppy attempt to discredit.

 

So you are saying Stereophile receives gifts...

Not sure you know how the industry works, but there are many perks, depending on who you are. Firstly, equipment might be "on loan" with no set date of return or there may be a heavily discounted accommodation price if you wish to keep the item you tested. It is also known that the distributor/manufacturer might "wine and dine" a reviewer when delivering a piece of gear. And last but not least, a reviewer might be flown to the factory, for a tour and several day accommodations and meals. These are normal sales perks in some industries and certainly true in audio

 

I am well aware @russ69 , hence why I found it specious that @axo1989 raised this issue w.r.t. ASR, considering, as many have noted, most of the items that ASR reviews that comes from manufacturers, are lower in cost. Amir appears to already own some high end components, so I am not sure what benefit he is getting from owning 20, <$1,000 DACs?