"See how we behave on ASR?"
Yes, like absolute arrogant "miscreants", who think they have nothing to learn from others.Just like Amir is behaving here.
So much for you all being open and accepting of other folks.....
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?
1,312 responses
I could ignore you all but thought there was so much misinformation that I should stop by and clarify. As I have shown, nothing in OP is accurate or correct. He starts with confusing me with another reviewer for heaven sake! The rest of your post I test far more than electronics. The list includes 250 speakers and 113 IEMs/Headphones for example. Electronics dominate because that is what folks send to me for testing and there are so many of them. I also test a bunch of audio tweaks from USB filters to power cables and conditioners. Folks send them to me and I test them. I don't run a charity. It is a hobby that I enjoy which happens to create a lot of value for audiophiles. ASR is a joint venture between membership and I. They send me a ton of gear to test. There is fair bit of expense in packing and shipping products back. Small percentage of the membership donates money toward this cause and also because they get a lot of value from the site. The approach is distinct from the standard model of companies sending products to reviewers. It gives me freedom to express any views I like. And unlike subjective reviews, measurements speak for themselves. So even with manufacturer sent gear, there is strong checks and balances. The effort has resulted in change in the industry with more and more companies adopting objective measurements in their design cycles. Those who have not, risk falling behind. Audiophiles have been exceptionally supportive. We have grown to one of the top audio sites in the world. As to bias, see what you are doing? If I say I don't listen, you complain that I don't. If say I do, you still complain. Which way do you want it? Well I tell you: look at the objective measurements, null tests, knowledge of technology that are the lead in every review. As to what topics I answer, I have answered a ton already. The format of the forum makes it hard to write replies or I would do a lot more. Then again, if this isn't enough, not sure more would help get some folks' heads out of the sand. But sure, in your next post instead of complaining and throwing rocks, clearly state what question you want me to answer. There is no technical topic that I am afraid of engaging in.
|
Ok Have you compared the components of the equipment sent to you by Yang with actual off the shelf components? Why do you not review reliability? There is a thread on ASR where 39%of Topping amp owners complain about problems. You disappeared and John Yang ran away. Why do you allow Yang to come on your site and rubbish manufacturers and designers? There are three to start off with that you ignored before."We have grown to one of the top audio sites in the world. " I won't comment on this but am chuckling to myself.
|
In other cases such as speakers and headphones, perfection is not remotely there agreed I think your disconnect is that you believe marketing hype I think YOUR disconnect is you believe your own hype You know, what every audio company claims with out a single shred of proof. No listening tests for example that demonstrates anything. You just made that up, for example you must know how Harman tests speakers and other products with blind listening tests. Do you think they invented it? What is remarkable is that in audio, person after person comes to the defense of manufacturers, You mean instead of attacking them like you do? So much money is wasted because consumers have put their guard down completely and joined the other camp! I could say the same thing, so much money has been wasted by the members of ASR on worthless name badges for their avatars, they could have saved so much money. Why do they come to the defense of someone writing sloppy reviews? Show them independent testing and they scuff at that. "Oh, this means nothing can be invented then. You do "independent" testing? Please post a link to something of yours in a peer reviewed journal like AES. Science, etc. BTW, links to the patents you have filed on your inventions would be nice too. You might think you can hear my toilet flush from where you live, but you can't really. That analogy just got a headless panther and it is starting to sound a bit desperate. I will cut you some slack but please, let's not go there, OK? Why not spend your extra cash on music? Or a nice meal? Or a vacation? Must you go and waste it away on some new power cable? A DAC? Why oh why? We are not all "financially independent" audio dealers like you that believe the subjective experience is a "fantasy" as you describe it. If you are so interested in my money start a new website, maybe "How to Get Rich Selling Subjective Fantasy's" (or name badges). It sounds very demeaning when you come here as a guest and proceed to start telling the actual members how to spend their money after flaunting your wealth in a previous post.
|
I could ignore you all but thought there was so much misinformation that I should stop by and clarify. You had to come here because this thread would be immediately taken down and everyone would be banned on your site. If you disagree keep open debates over at ASR and stop banning everyone. Then we could discuss on both sites. It would make your site better if you "listen" . There is no technical topic that I am afraid of engaging in. There are tons of technical questions in this thread that you seem to have avoided which is fine, I understand. But there are other threads on this site of a technical nature, No one is stopping you from technical debates here, when are you going to start?
|
I don’t find ASR or Amir objectionable, just irrelevant for my purposes and for many who frequent Audiogon. Why is everyone slamming him. I believe HE believes sincerely in his approach. Its like a good housekeeping seal of approval for a certain level of gear. Whats wrong with that? Some have a little too much time here, however, I might tune in if Amir and Danny squared off for a pillow fight. |
| Post removed |
Stay focused on what? What is is the ultimate goal?
And yet, here you are. With a "secondary" handle you took your time to establish and post under. New email and all. |
@crymeanaudioriver let the record show that never once have i referred to myself as an intellectual 😂 |
You say that but you don't follow that advice, do you? 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. One day a local distributor called us for a meeting. He said that we should source flat screen TVs from them. I asked them how their prices were compared to big box stores. He said, "if they have a sale, then our cost to you will be higher!' I asked him how we were going to do that? He said, "you can match their prices and then make money on selling them cables and extended warranty!!!" With cables having as much as 70% gross margin, you can see why he said that. Do you listen to this? No. You happily go and pay thousands of dollars for non-performant gear that only enriches the manufacturer at your expense. You believe what they say on their website. You believe random youtuber getting eval gear and gushing over said cable. And oh, the more expensive that cable, the better it must be. Never mind that the more expensive, the more it enriches the manufacture. So no, you don't believe in that. You are using it as a cheap talking point without foundation to boot. To repeat, all the information on ASR forum is available to everyone for free. No content is behind paywall or delayed for paying members to read first. Large number of ASR members read the forum without any contribution. And are not looked down upon whatsoever. I am fortunate enough to be independent and don't rely on ASR to make money. If it were different, I would turn on ads and allow sponsorships as all other sites do. Am I here to solve world hunger? No. I have my interested in what I like to do and test. It just happens that this interest aligns with the needs of many audiophiles. They appreciate the uncluttered site that is not running banners everywhere you look. Or my youtube channel where there is zero begging for subscription, likes, etc. And has no monetization even though I am fully qualified by Google to do so. If this is not for you, then that is that. But stick to facts and don't make proclamations that are simply not true.
Ooops ...Sorry ... Hit a nerve there huh...? BTW... my 2 chanel system consists of amplifier, pre-amplifier and phono pre-amplifier that are custom built KITS...SUT is custom built from various parts... tone arm is hand made in England. TT is vintage, with updated internal parts. Speakers are used, with updated OEM parts and upgrades from the designer. Yeah the Marketing Boggie Man really got me.... you really Nailed it. |
@amir_asr , I appreciate that you came to this thread and approached it with civility and respect and even an attempt to deliver, at times, an even handed education. I will caution you, though, I can see the frustration seeping into your posts, and I expect the urge to "lash out" gets stronger every time you return. If it is any consolation, you are not the first to go through this, or the probably even the 100th, and you will not be the last. I see it at least monthly, maybe more. Stay focused. This is but a small part of the audio world declining in influence. The only thing most of the participants in this thread are influencing is the marketing that targets them.
That was quite brilliant. |
@amir_asr "Measurements I perform are routinely replicated by manufacturers and other third-parties” - please provide proof to your statement. Amir, your equipment and tests are “too ancient” and missing novel micro-dynamics, transient, noise and more important performance metrics High volume manufacturing data is missing in your tests as well. I would recommend you to put disclaimer on your test results “test results are based on my personal skills and knowledge” to avoid legal issues. disclosure: I am experienced analog circuit design engineer, currently working at major US corporation |
No Faraday cage. Those are used for EMC testing. None of you use your stereo gear inside such a cage so I don't see why I should test them that way. Cabling for XLR is Mogami Gold. For RCA, I use Amazon Basics. No power conditioning is used or needed. I have tested a ton of these and either do nothing, or impair performance. I do have a LAB AC generator that I use for special testing. Ditto for DC lab generator." Thanks Amir for response! I can ignore your test results now! |
Sure, I don't have them all memorized but here are a few: Genelec (top manufacturer of studio monitors):
"Company was kind enough to review and approve the measurements you are about to see." Neumann (another top studio monitor manufacture): "You expect the company to deliver, and deliver it does! Other than a minor dip around 50 to 60 Hz, frequency response is flat and extends to both ends of audible spectrum. We exchanged measurements and company's on-axis response has a smaller dip to the tune of 0.8 dB. This has been a continuing theme with Neumann speaker bass response. Either they are wrong a bit here, or Klippel NFS is. No way to adjudicate. Doesn't matter anyway as your room will wildly modify that region so what the speaker outputs is pretty secondary other than amount of SPL it produces." Denon: "Note: Denon engineering was kind enough to review these measurements and confirm that they match their expectations." Trinnov (highest end manufacturer of AV processors): "The measurements you are about to see were reviewed by the company and were agreed upon as being representative. " Again, there is a lot more than this. I have reviewed 1,300 products in the last four years. If there were issues with my measurements, there would be riots in streets from manufactures. You don't see that. Instead you see companies like Schiit throwing out their obsolete audio measurement machine, buying the same unit I have, and a year later produce far more performant products. Indeed, they send me samples to test and now publish their own measurements. |
Well that was anti-climatic! :) FYI I own high-end cables like Transparent Audio, Audioquest, etc. that when needed, I use. Usually to deter excuses like you made above. But no, my measurement gear didn’t come with such cables, nor is there a single recommendation to use such. Do you have any data that measurements are impacted by the things you mention? Or is it just gut anxiety? |
@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. |
Too ancient? What is not too ancient if you don't mind listing? For now, my AP has a noise floor that is low enough to produce signal to noise ratio as high as 130 dB:
*Best case* dynamic range of our hearing system is 115 dB (limited by max SPL and noise level of the auditory system). With 130 dB like above, we have ample headroom. Transients are trivial to measure and I show them all the time to satisfy people even though they have so little meaning as far as fidelity. As to "high volume manufacturing," that is not my job. It is manufacturer's job. BTW, such testing usually uses (an obsolete) audio analyzer with "go/no go." Precision is not required there although would be appreciated if it existed. My job is to determine performance of an audio device. Not its reliability. No reviewer can give you that data. The fact that you think my equipment is "obsolete" to do that and that I am supposed to do such testing makes my head spin! |
@amir_asr "I have reviewed 1,300 products” in not authorized/certified LAB? WOW what is your background, engineering degree etc? |
Good deal. Please list the audio measurement gear you use and some of the data produced by it. And once there, please explain why you measure at all as some folks here seem to not like them at all. |
@amir_asr do I get it right what you say: -130dB using Amazon RCA basic cables in not shielded chamber? Without power filters or RFI noise control etc? |
@fleschler +1 on putting ASR reviews “under review”! :-) |
Good deal. But are we done with your conspiracy theory of me chasing money? If not, please state your remaining objection so I can address it. And yes, it is absolutely important to me that my ethics are not questions in that manner. |
By background is linked to in my signature on ASR. Here it is: You can also look at my linkedin profile: Amir Majidimehr - Founder - Audio Science Review | LinkedIn I am not a lab technician if that is what you are asking. Is your profile public somewhere? |
Yes to all except that measurement is balanced which is using ($30) Mogami Gold XLR cables. No filters. No cages. No nothing. Just a superbly engineered audio device being measured by state of the art audio measurement gear. They way you are stating that tells me you don't have any experience measuring such audio gear or with this instrument as that kind of performance is routine for devices I test. |
Sorry, no. The myth is that there is time limit to blind testing. Or that you are forced to use supplied music. The AES paper I referred you to allowed audiophiles to take a distortion box home, connect it to their system and spend as much time on it as they wanted, and play whatever wanted. They failed such a test compared to another group that performed fast AB switching. As to always getting null results, that is also completely wrong. I have passed and documented very challenging blind ABX tests. I am able to do that by being a trained critical listener and using very fast switching. If switching is slowed, I fail to test many if not all of them. I suggest reading ITU recommendation (standard) BS111.6 on how to detect small impairments: RECOMMENDATION ITU-R BS.1116-1* "Since long- and medium-term aural memory is unreliable, the test procedure should rely exclusively on short-term memory. This is best done if a near-instantaneous switching (see Note 1) method is used in conjunction with a triple You are arguing against the very nature of how your perception works. Not only experts in audio will disagree with you, so will those in the medical community who research the same. No way your brain has the capacity to remember every bit of fidelity in music you listen to hours and days later. It is impossible. But again, nothing in the protocol requires you to listen for longer if you so wish. I am just telling you that your ability to detect differences goes down. If you want to ignore that, then fine. Just make sure the test only involves your ears, and not the rest of your senses.\ Here is a video I produced on that:
|
I appreciate your time here, we won't ever agree but you have explained your process in detail and that is more than most would do. But I have a question about the quote above. You added you listen to loudspeakers "and equalization", can you explain that please. I'm assuming you equalize the loudspeaker for your listening session? Is that right? |
You are arguing against the very nature of how your perception works. You have already stated that you consider subjective experience is a fantasy. Is there something you are not perceiving yourself possibly? I am just telling you that your ability to detect differences goes down. If you want to ignore that, then fine. I am just telling you that your ability to convince me you are legit is going down. Posting links to third party research is legit like the AES white paper, all good. Posting links to your home movies might be entertaining (for you at least) but that isn’t considered legit third party research.
|
What? I said controlled listening tests, which by definition are subjective, are the gold standard. It seems you are not familiar with the terminology here. It is sighted, ad-hoc testing that produces highly unreliable conclusions. Just close your eyes, follow the protocol in the video I described and you get to proper audio truth about your gear. Otherwise, what you are saying is a mix of your state of mind and gear. |
@kota1 et al
Come on guys, you either place validity in the way Amir does things or you don't. (I happen to believe he is being as scientific about the process as he can. Me? I don't care how my 211 tube amp measures, I like it.) I also season my food to how I like it even if Emeril Lagase says I shouldn't.
Amir has been cordial, even with all the chirping. Let it go...be nice, visit his site or don't...why does it matter so deeply? |
Thank you. Answering your question, I use equalization as an investigation to see if the frequency response errors correspond to what I hear. Say there is a resonance at 1200 Hz. I pull that down with a filter. One of two things happen: it improves fidelity or it does not. If it is the former, then we know the objective measurements match subjective experience. And that the impairment is indeed audible. If on the other hand, the difference is not audible, or varies from track to track, then I declare it such. One positive side-effect is that others with the same speaker can apply that EQ and see if it improves their listening experience. Majority of the time this is the case. Other times, it is not as clear cut which is fine. |
@ghasley if he was a cordial guest he could host this discussion on his own site and reciprocate. He had to come here where we actually are cordial because if you go to his site.... |
I'll try to summarize- let's say an aviation enthusiast follows airplanes and can identify various aircraft by their sound. According to Amir, that is not possible. The person is deluding themselves because 1) A person cannot hear the minute differences in sound that the various types of aircraft make and 2) A person cannot remember the sounds various types of aircraft make. He shows dubious charts taken out of context to further his argument but if you go back and read through his responses he contradicts himself several times. For example, he says listening to the equipment he tests is not necessary but later he states that he does listening tests- on certain items. Now he says listening tests are ineffective. This is all bad science. No wonder it gets us all in aflutter. This comment by Amir regarding speaker upgrades: As to his upgrades making sense, they do most of the time from technical point of view. But not remotely on cost basis. He also detests EQ which can do the same thing for free. This statement reveals a lot- him saying that EQ can replace putting better components in a speaker (btw- in an earlier post he criticized a manufacturer for using cheap parts in their DAC but cheap parts in a speaker makes no difference apperently) shows that Amir does not understand Audio nor can he hear music the way we do. He cannot hear what we hear and that infuriates him. So he starts measuring gear to prove we cannot hear it either. He is in over his head. Owning a pile of test equipment is not a credential. To clarify- credentials are records of higher level education, certified training in a specific skill, published technical documents such as peer reviewed papers or text books, product designer/developer or maybe even just a good friend who can vouch for you. People here have asked that question repeatedly but he has not yet answered- other than to say he has lots of test equipment. I apologize in advance if I sound too harsh. I'm tired of being told that I am deluding myself by being in this hobby. It has given me much pleasure over these past 45 years.
|
Yes, Bose. Dr. Bose's graduate thesis was blind testing and removing frequencies his subjects didn't hear were missing. |
@tonywinga +1 "This comment by Amir regarding speaker upgrades: As to his upgrades making sense, they do most of the time from technical point of view. But not remotely on cost basis. He also detests EQ which can do the same thing for free.” -there is a pulse speaker response test available to prove Amir is wrong +1 "He is in over his head”- yep |
I used to know guys that could identify cars by their sound. They were into street racing and knew all the angles but certain makes had certain sound characteristics that couldn't be masked by any mods. Same goes for reviewers way back in the early days of CD players. A few with the "golden ears" could walk right into a listening session and state which DAC chip was being used without looking at it. It was more primitive back then so the field of DAC chips was quite narrow but they could "hear" the chip and it's attendant sound characteristics. All the best, |
@amir_asr thank you for your reply. Here is what you said: With other classes of devices, impairments get very small to non-existent. What devices specifically? I simply don’t have the time or resources for this type of testing. So measurements plus psychoacoustic analysis stand in as substitute. I take that as you basically back fit the test to get the outcome you want. Why not outsource it to a third party and not have to guesstimate it? Stuff subjectivists report are like fantasy to me. I understand that you are not able to measure your fantasies and so do you discount the subjective experience of your customers? Why are you selling audio equipment and trying to post reviews (albeit even though you state you lack the time and resources to be as thorough as possible) on a topic which you seem unable to connect with which is as subjective as a listening experience.
|
@amir_asr "Is your profile public somewhere?” I am your ASR-reader-(ex)customer, not adversary, thus sorry I don’t think you need to know details about my professional life. The question in this thread was about your professional reviewer credibility, not mine, Amir. |
I think the subject of audio memory is fascinating. And somewhat misunderstood. We certainly have very high bandwidth short-term memory (the type that works with fast/uninterrupted switching). We also have long term audio memory (lower bandwidth so our brains can store more of it). We have intermediate levels as well as different encoding and storage processes (I'd have to dig up relevant papers) but these two are enough for this discussion. I had an interesting experience a while back that cased me to re-assess two aspects of catechism: that amps that measure similarly well sound the same when performing within their limits; and that longer term audio memory is uninformative. I replaced one integrated amp (Krell KAV-300iL) with another (Micromega M150) when the former was damaged beyond repair. Standard suite of measurements for both with similar performance at normal listening levels, etc. Both class AB and similar output. Listening sighted and subjectively the Micromega resented different in stereo imaging (less width/depth) and bass timbre. The vendor recommended the dreaded break-in (I'm ok with that, my ear/brain needs it at least) and I'd get used to it, obviously. But I didn't. When I played new music it sounded pretty good. But when I played familiar stuff, it sounded 'wrong'. I can't tell you which was more accurate, of course that's not possible. But, based on long-term audio memory, the subjective impressions persisted over a few months of listening and my brain didn't adjust to the different sound. The old amp would work for 10-20 minutes or so before static built up and I could compare every now and then after a fashion. As the Micromega had XLR-out, I bought a secondhand power amp (Krell KAV-2250) and plugged it in. Stereo image and bass returned. So same source, same DAC/pre (the Micromega) but different power amp stage. I ran some measurements (Fuzzmeasure with mic at listening position) to see if euphonic second-harmonic distortion (or similar) was sweetening the bass. Not visible. Also ran room correction (Sonarworks) for FR and left-right imbalance. Not that either. That leaves a bunch of more esoteric stuff. The Micromega has a different power supply and likely more negative feedback. Some think the latter affects stereo imaging. On the bass side, Krell tend to go overboard on the power transformer (2KVA in the 2250). I'll speculate that the room (with some lateral/oblique mode nulls around 70-90 Hz) pushes against the speaker, and the Micromega doesn't have the current to push back as effectively. But, speculation is all. Anyway, my takeaway is that long term audio memory is a more complex story, it certainly has resilience and differentiation in my experience (but the efficacy for a reviewer who listens to many system will be a different story). Bass is pretty straightforward (watts are good, but current is better, if you'll excuse the vernacular). Stereo image is the complex product of many factors, starting with the recording, but I wouldn't rule out the amp-speaker-room system as contributor. According to ASR lore, this can be explained by sighted bias. I was (weirdly) biased against my new amp (I know, a bit contradictory). What I could hear, consistently over several months, was neurosis. While that logic is effectively hermetic, why not test, controlling for visual bias? Well, logistics (I'd need a comparator box to fast-switch, or a friend to slow-switch, or similar) so while I pondered the possibilities a storm took out the Micromega (lighting blew up the water main and fried everything on the ethernet network). Can't win. |
