Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy
"Audiophiles are Snobs" Youtube features an idiot! He states, with no equivocation, that $5,000 and $10,000 speakers sound equally good and a $500 and $5,000 integrated amp sound equally good. He is either deaf or a liar or both!
There is a site filled with posters like him called Audio Science Review. If a reasonable person posts, they immediately tear him down, using selected words and/or sentences from the reasonable poster as100% proof that the audiophile is dumb and stupid with his money. They also occasionally state that the high end audio equipment/cable/tweak sellers are criminals who commit fraud on the public. 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.
Have any of audiogon (or any other reasonable audio forum site) posters encountered this horrible group of miscreants?
please remember that all of us also exist in your shoes as well as ours. I like you hear things that later realize where not there. Have this happen to you enough times and you get sober and realize your perception is not what you think it is. That your intuition can be so wrong in audio.
@amir_asr
actually amir, in general, re the flow and motion of the physiology and the psychology...it is the other way around.
Discovery, over time. New things heard, in time. New understandings found, in time. New ways of thinking, in time. Revelation and realization, over time.
I'd say you are right, and that, IMO is true. but that is, generally, the lesser partner to things than new revelations are. Both in life and in audio.
If I had to out my finger on it, I'd say that your statement, contains the core of my main beef.
The linear mind. the engineering mind. the limited casting of an intellect. the safety net that people desire. The insanity of negative proofing in engineering, which originates in the aspects of mind that follow religion.
Which is originating in the part of the mind that has limited knowledge in things (slower cognition) and wants to keep the body safe and alive. Religion did not go anywhere, it became things like Dawkins (and a thousand others), and negative proofing in wanna-be science, or 'scientism'. Dogma posing as science. We call that engineering, literally. Seriously, on all fronts... and literally, by design.
Let me explain.
This was a known to be a thing, a huge central thing in fixation of the body/mind, in humans, overall. This was not the renaissance part of humanity, no, not at all. just the opposite, in fact.
In the mid-early 1700's, in Bavaria, some intellectual groups debated finding a way to make the world a better place. Secularism, as tied to the renaissance, was an established thing. The emergence of formal science, as forwarded by the given multi-faceted renaissance peoples, of the time. In this case, in Bavaria.
the idea they came up with is..that..if we have this large group of people, the masses overall, ie 70-80% of the people, who are prone to this religious belief thingiemabob, this follow and be in the crowd/herd/middle..this projection of safeing the self -by belief, as the given matter is complex intellectually....well..lets see if we can employ it. literally. Let's see if we can do something with the mundane and common aspect of people's propensity for living in dogma.
So, these renaissance people in Bavaria, came up with the rote learning/teaching method, for sciences, in some critical ways. In this.. if they could fill out the ranks of 'capable' people, then they could build an army to help build out the world with all this new science stuff.
These renaissance bavarians strated these schools of teaching rote information, and not dealing with solely searching out the heady renaissance people, alone. the uber thinkers where not the point, here. since dogmatic learning is the norm in humans, this seemed to be the way to go. They called it the Barvarian school of thought, re teaching methodology.
Books of facts to learn, books of tables, etc. Rote Teaching methodology was born in formal form.
They created a thing we eventually called engineering.
Engineering is all about facts, all about data, all about working with dogmatic data and has NOTHING to do with exploration and critical thinking. Let me stress that. Nothing to do with critical thinking, beyond following the data like it is a law, or a religion, with punishment if you do things wrong, and not according to the book. If it is not in the book, then it is not real. Just like religion, just like the dogmatic mind that has to fit into the society and crowd, just like the wiring of the mind of the masses of the peoples of the world. How that basic hard wiring of the mind comes into shape as rote learning, like a child copies the motions and expression of the adult. Zero critical thinking going on. Monkey see, monkey do.
The peak of that hard human fundamental... is the idea behind engineering. Where proper theories are called laws. Laws are for punishing people who go against the norm or religion. Laws are not for science but they ARE for groups of humans, or societies, or culture - or religion. the laws of physics is a literal, purposeful misinterpretation of theories of science. theories. no laws.
Science does not exist, at all, in the realm of negative proofing. But engineering is required to have negative proofing and laws, so people who are rote learners and engineers, can build things even if they don't really know creative renaissance scientific endeavor, at all.
Engineering is not science. Specifically, it is not science. It is religion, purposely framed and built. And it purposely exists in the realm of negative proofing so it can fit larger number of minds that exist out there, and help make all those dogmatic human minds ot there more fruitful and useful to themselves and all of us.
This is what the renaissance minds of the early 1720's to 1750's of Bavaria began to sculpt into shape. It is why the engineering schools or technical schools of Germany remain as the finest polytechnic institutes in the world today.
So, when ASR and the people in it, begin to EXPLORE and proffer things, to try to proof them out they are REQUIRED to turn all scientific 'laws' on their heads and RETURN THEM to their core and proper origin, which is as theories.
As theories are what scientists use, what science uses. Science and physics have NO laws, only theories, as theories can change or be modified and that is how humanity moves forward.
Engineers are purposely allowed to think of physics as laws, as that is all that this given mindset and mental frame can handle. It's how it works. It is allowed as it may come naturally to that person in engineering schools. if it (the given teaching) has to do with renaissance theorizing.. this would cause confusion in such minds.. and less people graduate and less people help the world be a better place.
But make no mistake, the dogmatic mind of most people was leveraged here, big time.
It's so bad that even physicists refer to it as the laws of physics, when hey know better and where taught better if they can bother to recall what they were TAUGHT.
What I mean here, is that I went to the local university and asked the heads of all the departments in physics. They each said that none of them ever teach that physics has laws, in permanence. but, it is referred to as laws as that is 'the norm'.
That human norm of dogmatic minds, it's impossible to escape, even our minds go there and cannot escape it -is the point. Or minds always fall back into expression via the colored glasses vehicle called homo sapiens.
So, when you sit here, and negative proof in that little bit I quoted, THAT is a huge error on the fundamental level and it CANNOT stand, period. Engineering and scientism/dogmatism cannot ever be allowed to speak for exploration in science.
Scientists are required to slap that down, if it tries to arise. Where engineering gets too big for it's britches.
Most won't as the masses can be dangerous, or manipulated, even. Just like happens with religion, politics and other ares of human life.
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.
all that be as it may, dogmatism, scientism, laws of physics, and engineering have to be slapped down, when they try and make life circular and limited in it's future endeavors.
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.
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?
@decooney"Most of the musical sounding components I prefer, don’t measure perfectly."
That is the whole point of this forum. The measurement guys are convinced, that better measurements equal better sound. Except better measurements just equal better measurements. Their favorite dig is: "Enjoy your distortion". Well, I do, thank you very much.
@russ69 .."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. The sound that comes out of my system is the only proof I need."
If you enjoy a particular type of sound - then that’s what you hear and like. 👍
Most of the musical sounding components I prefer, don’t measure perfectly.
@crymeanaudioriver Your statement concerning Amir’s TESTING of the CD trimmer is IRRELEVANT to my statement made of MY EXPERIENCE using it. The hatred and condescension in the replies to my experience was 100% uncalled for.
I am not upset with Amir’s testing although I disagree with it’s relevance over listening in different rooms with different systems (most often published and on-line reviewers indicate the equipment and multiple choices to test by ear, the equipment such as multiple amplifiers to match with speakers or multiple speakers to match with an amp, etc).
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.
As to your 100% certainty that all pressed CDs sound alike is up for discussion, not 100% certain. My friends in the manufacturing/stamping of CDs note the variation, somewhat like the variation in pressing of vinyl. My friends and I note that some variation in pressed CDs occur despite the manufacture in the SAME facility. Using the same digital information at different manufacturing plants can result in greater variation (I have 2 complete sets of the Mercury Living Presence classical CD reissues and it is very obvious about 15 of the early pressings sound very different). My friends and I have maybe a dozen copies of Kids Songs for Grown-Ups that there are variations in sound, relating to dynamics and tonal balance.
Now you can call that nonsense but here at Audiogon we can freely discuss our experiences, despite some test measurements that could maintain that there are no measurable differences.
As to reading CDs, I have tried numerous three beam laser transports using computer drives and find them inferior to old, single beam, single pass reading transports. I use one and so do my friends. I have heard some very expensive modern transports that sound great but at great cost. I haven’t heard all of them obviously. However, I use an extremely upgraded Arcam Delta 250 transport (15+ caps, resistors, 10 regulators) which uses the Philips CDM 9 laser system. On this site, we have had multiple forums on transports. My alternative choices to hear are the Jays Audio and Proceed transports. I tried the PS Audio, which I liked in concept but disliked in the resulting sound, possibly due to poor implementation such as cheap computer drive and/or parts. The same with Emotiva. They make well constructed, inexpensive, often good design quality CD players but use computer grade parts rather than audio grade parts. Again, just because computer grade parts measure great does not mean they sound great. I have had extensive experience with Marantz CD players new and old. In the past 12 years, they tend to have a less resolving and warmer tonal balance which is pleasant but inadequate for me (or my friends who also tried them). The 35 year old Kyocera 310 and 410 units, especially with upgraded power caps, sound more open and musically satisfying. They have ceramic vibration elements and a sapphire spindle using a single pass drive. I have four friends who use that as their main CD player and I use one in my secondary system.
I am the same way. The sound which pleases me comes from a single fullrange driver mounted on a transmission line and powered by a tube amplifier. That's what I like. I listen to a lot of chill music and vocals are the most important quality for me..."
We have a passion for the art of recorded music reproduction. We are feeling the emotional connection as we glance at a masters painting. Amir is analyzing the paint pigment and is missing the bigger picture. This hobby is big enough to let everybody join and share their experience. 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. The sound that comes out of my system is the only proof I need.
@kota1 Leave Amir alone LOL. He doesn't have to conform to you. His forum. His rules. Amir has many followers. Amir and his followers are not speaking kindly of us (specifically us two).
There are so many kinder and more open-minded Hi-Fi reviewers who lean heavily measurements. I find that their reviews are better written than Amir's. More words. Complete sentences. Fewer syntax/grammar errors. If ASR was in for the money, they would write more qualitative reviews. It's just absurd to mention the money. I think that Amir is doing a labor of love and that he's genuinely trying to cut through the BS perpetuated by marketing.
As a reader you can just take what you want from ASR. It's all free. You don't necessarily have to agree. That's my conclusion.
@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.
@tsushima1I get that he is attempting to defend his brand and of course, he has stated he is not running a charity either. He can bully members of ASR into buying name badges. He can bully manufacturers into hiring him as a "consultant" after attacking them on his site. But in the process of trying to defend his brand here he is using the same bullying tactics he uses at ASR. I think the end result is he is tarnishing his brand.
@amir_asr, no one here wants you to lose your income from selling name badges at ASR by jumping the shark. Why not use that passion for IT and objective data into something other than spamming us? Why not try engaging in some audio related threads other than this one. Participate, we won’t attack you if you are friendly, just try to remember, no one cares how much you know, until they know how much you care.
” Did you join this forum simply to keep spamming this thread with your propaganda? I don’t think you are attracting any new members, from these posts of yours. “
OldHvyMec at ASR makes cogent and experienced statements concerning "ALL things BREAK-IN." He has the reputation to make that assertion, especially in relation to cables/wires and equipment of all types (including audio).
HarmonicTHD member asserts "Cables are not mechanics. There is no wear, nor Burn-In, nor Break-In."
Then JSmith and Axo1989 talk about pancakes, off-topic and irrelevant.
This is a typical ASR dialogue.
Another poster introduced the pancakes, Reference to “moist” and “warm” is banter about descriptive terminology. Not irrelevant at all (I mentioned the ASR thread about “warm” in a post in this thread). That thread is about this thread, not about cables. You can join dots, surely?
This neatly encapsulates what some may perceive as your apparent myopia, and the associated problem that many have with ASR. If you believe that the above is truly a shared goal, then why on earth would you insist that better measuring components necessarily produce better sound?
Do you really imagine that those countless audiophiles who derive immense enjoyment from tube amplifiers, or Nelson Pass amps, would somehow find even greater enjoyment through the use of amps with lower distortion? Do you not understand that many, if not most of them, have spent decades optimizing their gear for precisely the purpose that you mention?
Pass, as you probably know, conducts listening tests on his new amp designs, the results of which have typically led him to intentionally introduce some distortion. In other words, a high percentage of listeners in those tests preferred the sound signature of the amps with some added distortion.
I think that part of the problem is that you, and many objectivists, conflate "best sound" and accuracy. Yes, you might reasonably argue that components with the least amount of distortion are more likely to reproduce recordings more accurately than those which introduce some distortion, but to then assume that such sound is necessarily "better" is a dubious leap.
"If I had to describe my place in this division, I would say I’m looking at a much bigger picture. I work with the end product, the sound that comes out of my loudspeakers. I’m working for a sound that pleases me. Mr. Amir is looking at the microscopic details, the grain of the wood, if you will, and I’m assembling an entire landscape. The tools I use are different than the tools he uses."
I am the same way. The sound which pleases me comes from a single fullrange driver mounted on a transmission line and powered by a tube amplifier. That's what I like. I listen to a lot of chill music and vocals are the most important quality for me.
Try explaining that to ASR. You will be ridiculed. Tube amplifiers = trash. Fullrange drivers = trash. No experience or subjective listening necessary. It is trash. Shame on you.
OldHvyMec at ASR makes cogent and experienced statements concerning "ALL things BREAK-IN." He has the reputation to make that assertion, especially in relation to cables/wires and equipment of all types (including audio).
HarmonicTHD member asserts "Cables are not mechanics. There is no wear, nor Burn-In, nor Break-In."
Then JSmith and Axo1989 talk about pancakes, off-topic and irrelevant.
Some of the posters music choices range from rap to hip hop and anything pop oriented created in the past from 1995.
How on earth did this pass as an argument? "Some of the posters" listen to this and some other music? What if they did? That makes them less of a music lover and audiophile?
You expletive!!! (reposted because I don't want to stoop down to his level) You are doing exactly what your minions did to me. Taking what I said out of context. I said one poster listened to a type of music which would be difficult to use to achieve an evaluation of the loudspeaker or system sound. I said that it could be appealing to that listeners choice of music. I NEVER stated that that listener's choice of music was wrong or anything about his character. You pervert other posters thoughts here as your minions do on ASR. Character assassin!!!
@jtgofishI mentioned two such ASR member posters who appear quite reasonable (one who has gotten lambasted like me) and another who posts but no one appears to confront him. I’m sure there are others. Note that my disagreements are character assassination based, defamation, not with his ASR business practices which I may disagree on but are perfectly legal (unlike posters who want to put high end manufacturers in prison for allegedly defrauding the public). So, it’s not us versus them in my forum, but defamation (the taking of a person’s good name is almost like killing them) and lack of transparency while uttering unsupported or undersupported assertations of equipment quality. Now this is not just most ASR members but Amir himself who commits defamation of character.
"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)."
This comment is so wrong it is not funny and shows you know absolutely nothing about wine. Ask an MW what they think about this if you do not believe me. If this comment is an indication of similar knowledge about audio equipment, then I suggest you either read, listen and learn a lot more or go back to ASR and stay there.
@crymeanaudioriver You are in league with Amir. I have no qualms about Amir's ASR testing equipment site. That's his business. I detest anyone who perverts a neutral statement I make into something that attacks another's character for that reason. This is what ASR minions and now Amir on THIS SITE has done!!! He has personally perverted what I did not do for his own jollies. He is an evil person. It is called Defamation.
His malicious and unjustified harming of a person's good reputation. That's me.
"all too often they discredit themselves by engaging in character assassination" That's Amir (just like his site).
Fleschler,There are some regular posters on ASR who are quite patient and civil .However some are just arrogant and aggressive and intolerant of different perspectives and they also happen to be moderators.They are also all Americans.It did occur to me that might just be a sad reflection of how bipartisan and divided that society has become.I have American friends who have related how pervasive and toxic that "us and them' attitude has become and how glad they are to be out of it.It certainly comes as a bit of a shock to those that are not used to it.
@amir_asr "Some of you know that I am the founder of a company (Madrona Digital) that does custom integration of electronics into very high end homes."
I don't know your work (why don't you tell us about these custom high end installations)?
When I was a commercial real estate appraiser, I had occasion to appraise some quite fancy homes in the late-1980s ranging in $5 to $10 million in value. I remember one Malibu Riviera home of $10 million that had Martin Logan electrostats mounted in the walls facing each other 2 stories high. Wow, that must have sounded great (terrible in fact). I saw rich homeowners hiring video and audio installers with $250,000+ systems that were terrible sounding (good video though). I take no credence in your company's installations unless 1. I know what components were used and 2. (unlikely to happen) I can hear the results for myself.
@amir_asr "There is no wall at ASR. Hundreds of members join the forum from all walks of life. Only a handful get banned because all they want to do is argue and not provide any data to the conversation."
THIS IS A LIE!!!! My first post was my personal experience with the CD trimmer. I shared that I purchased it very cheap to TRY it. I didn’t find it worthwhile (compared to destating a CD prior to play) and could make a big % profit reselling it. What was so wrong with that? Instead, immediate character assassination by your minions. I stated some more experience and opinions and whamo, I was constantly insulted. I hurled one back and voila! I received a warning. This kept going for an hour or two and I was banned. Everything I said in a neutral and explanatory vein was excised. The excision part of the statement was turned upside down and altered to state a negative rather than a neutral. I mentioned that I have underground power lines in my community. I didn't say it was good or bad but rare to have an outage. Those minions tore it apart giving it all kinds of meanings and of course, character assassination that I was professing that I am superior to them. I never stated any such thing and would not as I don't know any of them personally.
Yeah, your site is really a nice place to visit-NOT!!!
As an audio equipment reviewer, why do you choose not to actually listen (with music) to every audio component you review?
Note that I already understand (from your prior post) that you do listen to speakers & headphones. I'm wondering why you limit actual listening tests to those and don't bother to listen (again with music) to amps, dac's, etc."
amir asked boxer12....
"Why would you trust what I would have to say about it? Why do you trust anyone? Is your room the same as theirs? You play the same music? Your ears are the same? You see the problem?"
boxer12 answers...
1. I wouldn’t, but it would be a human datapoint. Get enough of those right & I might trust your opinion (somewhat at least)
2. I do trust the opinion of some experienced audiophiles
3. No, but those I trust have room treatments of some sort. They listen to music & treat their rooms accordingly, as do I
4. Irrelevant
5. No & I’m well aware of that (also fine with it). Surprised you bring it us though.
6. Yes, you trust you’re measuring all the right things so human interface with the audio component is not necessary.
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.
@amir_asryou have already shared that you lack the time and resources to do thorough reviews. If you want to post videos try using a third party, this is just spam, after spam, after spam. Are you trolling to sell more name badges? No.
That is what is putting off many folks here and elsewhere. It seems like you are not ready to accept any more NEW knowledge and have a closed view.
Did you join this forum simply to keep spamming this thread with your propaganda? I don’t think you are attracting any new members, from these posts of yours. Flaunting your "financial independence", insisting how members should spend their money. I won’t bring up your poddy mouth attempt at humor.
However, you can certainly learn a lot here- about how to make ASR a better audio forum, deal with your fantasies/phobia of the subjective side of audio, pick up some tips on whatever else you are interested in.
@amir_asr, please stop with the home movies, if you want to drop some knowledge, all good. You say you are into technical discussion, why not drop in and discuss then, for example:
Terrible of them, I know. Why let them have common sense and expect more performance when you pay more?
You twist posts per your liking. Anyways, I took quite some time to arrive at the speakers I have. There were some that were about $7k more than my current ones. But I did not really like their presentation. So if I had to go with your statement, I should have paid more and bought that other speaker expecting more performance because I paid more?
I think you have a very wrong assumptions about folks here. When I take the pains to audition loudspeakers, I did not go in with the intention to buy the most expensive speaker I can buy. In fact go back to my initial posts from 2005. I used to have the Quad 21L before these current ones. They were not even there in the list of "to be auditioned" speakers. I just happened to see them at a dealers and asked for a demo. So probably that was a mistake and I should have gone for the more expensive ones? I suggest that you don’t assume things.
Ah, you want me to be uninformed when I do my listening tests. As if not seeing the measurements somehow eliminate bias?
Like I said before - you will not digest the truth. According to you, folks here can be biased, but you are always correct and never biased. You are an ordinary human being. Nothing more nothing less. You have biases too, but not ready to accept.
I listen to tons of music. I am retired so I have all the time in the world.
Good for you. And completely understand now how you can afford so much time to measure and respond.
Well, we darn well know how to measure noise even if they don’t. They say this and that lowers jitter? Well, we measure that every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
And yet you did not respond to my post on why different people hear the same sound differently. Like I said before, far too many variables to measure.
When you get sick, you don’t want your doctor to take your temperature and blood pressure on the fear that "he thinks measurements are everything."
Again, you are ASSUMING here. Your problem is you ASSUME too many things. Why do you assume that I would not go to a doctor if I were sick? These statements are showing your frustrations. Is it because you cannot ban me on this forum? We are plainly debating on what each of us believes in.
I managed the signal processing group at Microsoft which relies hugely on psychoacoustics.
So you are telling me that the Microsoft from a few years back was the best they can do and if further discoveries happen in the field of science, they will not adapt/accept them? Electronics in 1950s was much different than what humans have achieved today. New discoveries happen all the time - at a much faster rate. Just saying.
I know what I need to know about perception of audio. No knowledge of "neural science" is needed, nor do any of you have any.
See that first statement? That is what is putting off many folks here and elsewhere. It seems like you are not ready to accept any more NEW knowledge and have a closed view. I humbly accept that I do not have the knowledge of neural sciences or any other related fields in that space.
As for visiting ASR - I have done so occasionally in the past and have moved on, since that is something which does not interest me. I know what I like and I choose what I want. I do read mags, sites and user reviews. If you looks closely at my system, there is not a component that was highly recommended on many site. A couple of sites and user reviews - maybe. Of course the Oppo was an exception. But then many mags, site (including yours), folks recommended it and love it.
I was not trying to mischaracterize you. All I wanted to point out that you do not know everything about everything. Like everyone else, you know something about something. There are many things that humans do not know - yet.
Looks like a lot of frustration, when you are responding to my posts. You had to go back to my post 6 times and read them carefully and come up with 6 responses after picking and choosing what you wanted. I would have thought that a person who has all the time in the world would take time to go through the entire post, and think carefully about how to respond to it. But again - that is none of my business.
How do you know this take away is true? Better yet, how can you prove this take away is true? Where is the proof point? At no time did you perform a controlled test like I mentioned in the video, correct? Without it, your conclusions are only yours. They present no value on the topic at hand. Indeed, they go against the consensus of audio research community which has tested these theories.
I don’t know. That’s why I called it "my takeaway" and not "my evidence" or "my proof". I was quite clear that they were sighted, subjective observations. And that I made limited tests for some possible confounding factors. I also used the word "speculation". I don’t know why you often appear to argue with straw men, and labour your talking points when they are already accounted for, but I don’t want to criticise tone, style or even comprehension as that’s counter-productive.
If you care to address what I’ve said, feel free to tell me which of these have zero bearing on the topic at hand and/or go against the consensus of audio (or psycho-acoustic) research, and why: 1) long term audio memory is a more complex story, 2) bass is pretty straightforward, or 3) stereo image is the complex product of many factors (which the amp-speaker-room system contributes to). Those are the words you responded to.
Please remember that all of us also exist in your shoes as well as ours. I like you hear things that later realize where not there. Have this happen to you enough times and you get sober and realize your perception is not what you think it is. That your intuition can be so wrong in audio.
I agree, and I’ve certainly had those experiences working with sound. Many times. But what about things we hear, that we later hear again, and again, accounting as best we can for the limitations of our perception and judgement? Now of course it’s possible that unconscious factors rather than actual sonics caused the difference I perceived between those devices (for example) but that’s also speculative. We can also differentiate to some degree between perception and intuition, especially with training and experience. The working hypothesis that every time we hear something unexpected, we are drunk, neurotic or hypnotised by marketing is an over-simplification. I’m happy to leave you with that.
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.
"My favorite is that Amir only needed one speaker to test and supposedly in his anechoic chamber."
All speakers in the industry are measured one at a time. No way you want to put two in there and have them create interference. If you did, you would not know the response of either one.
You are repeating an argument you don't understand. So let me help you. The argument is why I use a single speaker to *listen to* NOT measure. Measurements are always done with one speaker. Ask any speaker company and they will tell you the same thing.
On the topic of listening to just one speaker, it is what science says is best. It may not make intuitive sense to you but that is why you want to follow science. Not your lay intuition. I have a video on this topic as well:
Testing one speaker also sharply reduces shipping costs and lets me test more of them. Science is good for us sometimes! Try it. :)
You have a degree in electrical engineering field and that is awesome. Kudos to you. But neural sciences and the other fields doing research are not your forte. You seem to portray on your site that measurements are the end-all. I disagree on that with you.
I managed the signal processing group at Microsoft which relies hugely on psychoacoustics. I know what I need to know about perception of audio. No knowledge of "neural science" is needed, nor do any of you have any.
As to ASR, it is clear you have not spent much time there. We have a ton of luminaries there in audio discussing every aspect of audio. It is not just me.
So disagree all you want. But don't mischaracterize me or the forum.
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.
I don't throw rocks and I don't want you to answer anything. Just stop telling folks that measurements tell you everything.
You just "wondered" if I listen to music. That didn't require answering?
That aside, you are the one saying "measurements tell you everything," not me. I have repeatedly stated that half of my reviews including listening tests. I also use other techniques like Null testing with real music. I have said that controlled listening test are the gold standard. Why isn't this message sinking in?
But yes, there is no denying of the power of measurements. They cut through audio folklore like butter. Company claims this and that tweak reduces noise? Well, we darn well know how to measure noise even if they don't. They say this and that lowers jitter? Well, we measure that every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Company says that this and that design produces the most transparent sound? Well, if distortions and noise are not competitive, then sure as heck does not do that.
When you get sick, you don't want your doctor to take your temperature and blood pressure on the fear that "he thinks measurements are everything." Measurements do not have to be everything to be incredibly useful and powerful.. Go without them at your own peril.
"And I say that you are also biased because you see the measurements and then listen."
Ah, you want me to be uninformed when I do my listening tests. As if not seeing the measurements somehow eliminate bias? Seeing the gear, etc. is not a concern of yours but accurate measurements are? Instead of typing, here is a video I produced on this very topic:
All I want to point out is that you say folks on this site are biased because they see the price and hence expectations increase.
Terrible of them, I know. Why let them have common sense and expect more performance when you pay more? It is audio after all. We should make new rules for that expenditure. I pay for a supercharger option for a car. Company delivers it and it reduces horsepower. I should be OK with that according to that rule....
Regardless, I have no issue with recommending ultra expensive gear: they just need to have the performance that is comparable to devices at 1/10th their cost. If they don't, then I will comment and withhold my recommendation.
This is my primary issue with ASR. 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.
My favorite is that Amir only needed one speaker to test and supposedly in his anechoic chamber. Then proclaiming that the speaker was worthless based on the measurements - without even listening to it, properly placed in a room, with controls, etc. Or when he talked about speaker frequency response curves and claimed that his measurement of another speaker was superior because the manufacturer used a different scale on the response graph. Of course, he didn't know what he was actually measuring and what the measurement actually meant, and looked like a complete fool while taking himself completely seriously.
Normally I don't really care about that stuff as I know what I know, but when it impacts the 'little guy' who's just trying to make a living selling legitimate gear (I'm not talking about pure snake oil here, I'm talking about people who have a legitimate product who are attacked by Amir / ASR with inaccurate information.) I do take issue with it.
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.
Yup. Those type of comments are par for the course here as it's taken for what it sincerely is: adult banter. The problem with acolytes like yourself is that you need to get out more often and grow a thicker skin.
Our aim is the same as yours. We want maximum enjoyment out of our music and want to optimize our gear to get there
Then right in this thread you also said:
We are not a charity
However, I am OK with you coming over here to spam us then, OK. So, you made a wise decision to at least to focus on maximum enjoyment of music. First, the actual enjoyment part it is ALL subjective so leave your fantasies at home. We deal in BOTH things you can measure like sinad and things you can’t measure so clearly like jamming or rocking out, bliss, chilling, whatever.
I saw the pic of your system, nice speakers, good. So, if you want maximum enjoyment of music try:
1) Having a drink
2) Asking members here about their EXPERIENCE (I know, you can’t always measure that but with practice, it works, trust me)
3) Please realize we actually DO want the same thing, it isn’t a fantasy. You can also measure some things that are purely subjective. If you start a thread at YOUR site maybe we can discuss sometime OK? If you want to start a thread here I am good with that too.
How about a different perspective like this?Perhaps the last 50 years of amplifier and speaker design has really just been a case of two wrongs trying to make a right .So what is the point of measuring things that are only a reflection of that-like load invariant amplifiers for example.
@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.
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.
Never seen an audio fluffer before, not as good as this one.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
