@nicsadler  I have no issue with ASR as a whole and it’s message or what the goal is. I think it’s debunked lots of myths in audio and am thankful for it. However Amir’s responses to these questions and how he cherry picks what to respond to leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. That is bias by the very definition of it.

The way I see it is there are three points in this triangle. The ASR folks, who want to be science drive and asses everything as robot in an anechoic chamber. The Audiogon people who listen with their hearts and maybe eyes sometimes. Then there is Gearspace.com of people who are in the professional world and do this for a living. I’ve run many systems in my home space that are meant for professional use in some instances and even the "pros" want different things with non flat responses or the flattest speakers in the world don’t translate mids. There is nuance to everything and I realize the above buckets are over generalizations.

Amir can say what he wants. I have no issue with any of it. I have no issue with him selling speakers he reps on his website. What I do have issue with is him saying its a totally free space and attacking other reviewers on his website because it doesnt match his strict view of science, or he feels they are monetizing like Erin. He goes on to claim he doesnt need the money, and doesnt make money from the site despite the fact that I guarantee that is in no way true. He accepts donations.

If you’re gonna base your credibility on hard facts, don’t contradict yourself and then not answer to it. With the cherry on top being he acts like a jerk much of the time.

True heroes admit they could be wrong, and are open to interpretation. IMO. I haven’t one time throughout this entire conversation say hey there is validity to what someone is saying. It’s: "Nope you’re wrong!" That is ridiculous.

P.S. Libel always is the last point people go to. This is an online forum. Not a court of law. Better call in Clarence Thomas.

i believe you ON YOUR WORDS that perhaps this physicist is not knowable in high end audio...

HAVE YOU NOT OBSERVED THAT I CITED ANOTHER PHYSICIST WHO WORK IN HIGH END AUDIO ?

 

answer him... AND IT IS NOT ABOUT CABLES PROTOCOLS HERE  I am not interest to listen a cable protocols debunking by you ...I am sure you are good at it.... This does not means that your claims about hearing and gear measurements are right...

I am interested in fundamentals about human hearing, and this fundamentals demolish your claim to equate measurements of gear and qualitative hearing perception...

Did you not watch the video I provided where I go through every one of his tests and demonstrate why they are all completely wrong? Here it is again:s cientific Proof of Measurable Difference in Audio Cables? Paper Review https://youtu.be/a0p3D_Gv6IYI go on for 41 minutes breaking down every claim and test in his paper. Please don’t keep demanding that I answer you when I have already done so.

 

DEBUNK THIS ONE AMIR :

This physicist is Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen, His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems

«Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. »

https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

 

«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion
levels, sound different. It is to be expected that ten (10) different designs will produce ten different responses to music signals and thus receive a different perceptual qualification.»

This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊

By the way he say the same thing that Oppenheim and Magnasco :

«Although it is outside the scope of this paper, it should be noted that human hearing is likely to be neither linear nor time-invariant,...»

https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

 

 

I had no idea "true-believer" Audiophiles were so thin-skinned.

"https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion
levels, sound different. It is to be expected that ten (10) different designs will produce ten different responses to music signals and thus receive a different perceptual qualification.»

This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊"

I read through it.  There is little there to comment about.  Your audio gear does NOT have memory in it.  He creates a simple circuit that does and shows trivial scope simulations of it.  Enough to fool a layman into thinking there is some measuring going on.

He also makes other dubious comments:

". Another well-known example is the upper frequency hearing limit: as humans cannot hear above 20 kHz, the reasoning is that there is no use in reproducing higher frequencies, as these will not contribute to the signal, reaching the brain. This argument has often been brought to the table to disqualify high-resolution audio. However, many high-end enthusiasts claim they can clearly hear the difference and even seniors, with an upper frequency upper limit of 10 kHz (like the author) can distinguish the difference."

First, this has nothing to do with fourier transform.  Second, I post ABX tests of high res that I did pass.  But I am confident none of you can, including the author or said paper.  You never throw such random claims in a proper paper.  If what he says is true, you need to show it in controlled listening tests which he has none.

Really, none of what you post has anything to do with ASR and value of what we are doing.

@somethingsomethingaudio - I have read with great interest this entire thread. I find it very hard to understand how Amir is being so consistently attacked when he appears to be offering a perspective with very clearly marked boundaries. Many accusations here are without any merit or grace.

I have no personal connection with Amir. We emailed once over a year ago with regard to a Phono pre-amp he reviewed. I suggested he re-examine it using the fully balanced signal path offered, not the single ended in and balanced out which was the method used in the review. Our discussion was respectful and informative. Which is precisely my opinion of his responses here.

He is clearly touching a nerve with some. But he does not deserve some of the pig-headed badgering here. It’s undignified.

Amir dont answer to true scientific question...It seems...

I will repeat :

Amir information about gear is USEFUL....

 But Amir claims trashing all listening experience if not based on his measurements is MEANINGLESS by psycho-acoustic science...

I cite 4 physicists saying the same thing on different perspective... He never answer them nor the question ... Save for one which is supposed to be ignorant in cables protocols and measurement...😊 Ok then answer the OTHERS...

The crux of the matter is not CABLES here, it is the relation between hearing which work in the non symmetrical time domain and non lienarly, then Fourir methods are not enough to describe human hearings... Then the allegation to related gear measurements to be the main factor for predicting qualitative audio perception is FALSE...

"I am interested in fundamentals about human hearing, and this fundamentals demolish your claim to equate measurements of gear and qualitative hearing perception..."

Then you better hang around ASR, watch the videos I post, etc. and really learn the topic.  Don't go hanging your hat on stuff you don't understand and put them forward as proof of anything.  These papers such as Kunchur's have been discussed extensively and he has been shown to have no relevant knowledge of audio.   Join us, ask questions and we are happy to explain and discuss.  Otherwise you are not really interested I am afraid.

"Amir claims trashing all listening experience if not based on his measurements is MEANINGLESS  by psycho-acustic science..."

Totally wrong.  Listening tests are incredibly valuable.  But they only create value if they are conducted properly.  If not, they produce noise, not data or knowledge.  

Above has nothing to do with whether you believe in measurements or not. 

First, this has nothing to do with fourier transform.

The crux of the question is precisely about the fourier method and the impossibility to work with it in the time domain...

 

YOUR TOOLS WORK measuring gear components not hearing abilities...

YOU PLAY WITH ME... It is not polite...

 

The article by Oppenheim and Magnasco is about LISTENING TESTS...

And they demonstrate the human hearing abilities beating the Gabor limit and the Fourier uncertainty...

Then your measuring tools are adequate for gear measurements components not for  establishing  the value of hearing experience...

You act as a GURU equatiing  measuring gear components tools with hearing experience...You refused to discuss the meaning of the Oppenheim and Magnasco listenings experiments...

Your tools dont works in the time domain analysis and work in a time symmetrical domain... The ears /brain dont work as that...

Answer this physicist who works in high end audio ABOVE , and state that clearly the ears /brain works in the time domain and your tools cannot measure hearing experience only the specs accuracy of gear ...

DEBUNK THIS ONE AMIR :

This physicist is Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen, His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems

«Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. »

https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

 

«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion
levels, sound different. It is to be expected that ten (10) different designs will produce ten different responses to music signals and thus receive a different perceptual qualification.»

This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊

By the way he say the same thing that Oppenheim and Magnasco :

«Although it is outside the scope of this paper, it should be noted that human hearing is likely to be neither linear nor time-invariant,...»

https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

 

@nicsadler I don’t disagree with you. Some people have been ridiculous here, and I’ve addressed it. @soundfield doesn’t get my business because from my perspective they are being petty and passive aggressive.

With that being said I don’t get Amir is taking that tone here as he did with you in email. I understand he is being prodded from all angles, but don’t make claims you can’t back up.

All I have wanted answered from @amir_asr is how he can claim to allow Erin’s video, be open to the discussion, call something that innocuous click bait and then close the thread so no more information can be had from it. I like top lists. I think they get to a core of what we all want. The best. He is in complete contradiction to himself and inviting more attacks by claiming he is one thing and then doing another. He literally replied to my reply and sidestepped my request to answer a simple question time and time again.

It comes across as snooty and worse. Kind of like how Ellen Degeneres had a talk show where she purported to be a good person who cares and then behind the scenes wasnt nice. It wasnt a well kept secret and I could see it all over her. Not saying he is approaching her level of nastiness, but the conditions are similar where he is evangelizing himself and not realizing how down right condescending he sounds. It’s gross.

This whole conversation has turned me off of audio. I come here to discuss and learn about great sound. I use all of my senses and my brain and data to do that. I don’t come here to discuss politics and it feels like I am an independent in a two party system. You calling me a thin skinned true believer supports that. I don’t even know what a true believer is. I believe it what I like and enjoy. Period.

Incredible!

It is impossible to discuss with you Amir...

You are here to recruit?

I am here to discuss...

You answered BESIDE my points completely...

You cannot equate your measures of gear components as replacement for hearing experience and you cannot even claim that this is better than hearing experience...

This is IDEOLOGY not science...

Your measures of gear are useful to inform us about some claims and truths about their specs THATS ALL...

Anything further is no more credible scientifically...

You never answered...

And i am among the few one here giving FACTS FROM 4 DIFFERENT PHYSICISTS ARTICLES PDF , ALL SAYING THE SAME THINGS, i did not give you insults...

I know believe that your motives are less desinterested than what it seems or what you claims ...

Yes i am naive... i am too serious to be cynical... 😊

By the way i taught reading analysis...Then english is not at all my spoken language, i almost never spoke it and learn it in philosophy books or science books, i express myself then in a clumsy way... ...But i am able to read ....

 

 

«The emperors may be had no clothes but my wife had many» -- Groucho Marx 🤓

@nicsadler

I find this hostility toward Amir more than shocking. Some of the accusations here border on the libelous and certainly do not reflect reality.

....

I find it very hard to understand how Amir is being so consistently attacked when he appears to be offering a perspective with very clearly marked boundaries. Many accusations here are without any merit or grace.

 

Unfortunately, as we have seen all too often through history, as soon as some people see their vested interests being attacked they will readily resort to hostility when some of us might prefer dignified discourse.

Sheer naked greed is the root of many an evil.

10,000 years of civilization has really done very little to change the nature of the beast.

As much as I’d like to see myself and my fellow audiophiles as being a little better than that, far too many times some of the responses here lapse into rudeness and even vulgarity.

Evolution moves surely but slowly.

By the way, did anyone mention peace talks regarding the situation in Ukraine between the Globalists and the Russians?

I thought not.

@somethingsomethingaudio  I wasn't calling you thin skinned. You don't seem to be. You seem measured and rational to me. Unlike some other commenters here that prefer badgering to discussion.

We certainly have a difference of opinion, and I didn't mean to disrespect you if it came across that way.

I too am more than a little jaded by the audiophile community. I thought it's woo-woo extremes were just a funny oddity. Though this lately has become a form of impassioned belief that defies logic.

Oh well. I'm off to walk the dog. Wish I could ask him about his opinion about the upper frequencies of my speakers I can no longer hear. I'd value his opinion on it. Though all he want is treats and a scratch. I envy him.

If you believe in blind tests, how come you are not arguing with folks here saying they are not useful? Not convenient for business AJ?

Amir, you kicked me off your "Audio Science" forum for being "too objective", because I insisted only valid listening tests mattered, not "SINAD" and "ETC" many of your cult worship. "Valid" in the same sense that you didn’t get to administer your own Math tests in school, lest you always get an A. As I pointed out earlier, you have a long history of fabricating "Blind" tests. Foobar ABX can and has been gamed. There are threads about it on HA. Again you forget you posted a picture of the real time analyzers you use on the test signals, plus admitted to cranking up the silence to cheat. What you will never do is a public test administered by someone else. You know, the bare minimum standard used for AES, JJ, Toole, etc. Your gamed online Foobar tests wouldn’t pass basic paper submittal review.

Attending PAF next year? 😉

@nicsadler Thanks for your reply. Hope you and your doggo have a great walk. Enjoy. 

What speakers do you use? Out of curiosity.

@mahgister 

"It is impossible to discuss with you Amir...

You are here to recruit?

I am here to discuss..."

 

You are patently not. I've followed your discussion with Amir. And while you make some interesting points, your rush to express your opinion betrays your interest in trying to comprehend what Amir is saying. So, instead you badger him for answers to questions he has adequately answered more than once.

I'd try a new approach. Because you sound very frustrated. And from my perspective, that frustration is born out of a lack of comprehension.

Blind test are useful for short term memory verification of subtle audio cues...

You dont  pick gear choice by blind tests and measures numbers only...

Trained ears in acoustic or musicians dont use blind test because they work with long term acquired acoustic cues perception habit...

Amir negate this and claim it  to be ONLY  delusion because he think his measuring tools are adequate to replace the ears natural long experience and in some case trained in acoustic and music ...

but   the way psycho-acoustic reveal how the ears/brain work in non symmetrical time domain and with non linear hearing strctures and methods contradict his llinear  analysis time symmetrically dependant tools ... A pair of ears is no electrical tools...Fourier methods are no more enough to understand human hearing, then it is preposterous to reduce human hearing to gear measuring tools... Only ignorant people can believe that...

Not one of the 4 physicist articles i proposed contradict my stance, it is the opposite and Amir was unable and unwilling to go on that road... His goal then appear to be a circle around him not truth...

@soundfield ​​@amir_asr Make love and get it over with already. I could cut the sexual tension with a knife! You two are so excited for the other.

@somethingsomethingaudio

I have a rare L-C-R set of ATC SCM100ASL active mid-field studio monitors as my fronts, made originally for Abbey Road. Three subs, two in stereo supporting the L&R with one 16" sub dedicated to LFE for DSD and Video content. Rears are Harbeth 40.2’s and 6 overhead ceiling mounted Definitive Audio 3-way monitors for height/Atmos. I have dedicated 2-channel path that bypasses the AVR I use for video.

Do you undertand what is the time domain ?

Do you understand that hearing is related to the long history of decoding natural sounds meanings then hearing works in a non symmetrical time dimension and non linearly at all ?

Amir never answered about that and about the 4 physicist i summoned all saying the same things..

Then i am here to discuss...Why did you claim i am not for discussion ?

who else here proposed 4 articles for the discussion ?

Where are Amir psycho-acoustic science backing his claim about hearing experience not so valuable as gear measuring tools ?

You are so naive to believe posting a tool analysis of an amplifier is a proof in psycho-acoustic and an answer to my 4 articles ?

Answering my point in psycho-acoustic by proposing chart analysis of amplifiers or cables is NOT AN ANSWER...

Before judging my posts have you read the 4 articles?

What means for you the fact that human hearing beat the fourier uncertainty? say to me what this means please ?

i wait...

 

By the way you said i lack comprehension about Amir...

Sorry but i thank him about the measures information about the gear...

I cannot accept his stance about hearing experience to be replaced by the listenings methods he proposed based on his gear measuring methods and then the bashing of any OTHER hearing experience...

Perhaps you did not understand the points discussed in these articles? the human hearing limits are not those Amir claim they are...

What did they said these articles ? Try yourself to understand BEFORE JUDGING ME ...

You are patently not. I’ve followed your discussion with Amir. And while you make some interesting points, your rush to express your opinion betrays your interest in trying to comprehend what Amir is saying. So, instead you badger him for answers to questions he has adequately answered more than once.

Are you able to read this : ( why amir did not answered about this article physicist ?

I discuss here, not him ,because he refused to answer about fact... The ears dont work as his measuring gear tools... And nobody can predict how an amplifier will sound only with measures of some specs...

This physicist is Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen, His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems

«Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. »

https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

 

«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion
levels, sound different. It is to be expected that ten (10) different designs will produce ten different responses to music signals and thus receive a different perceptual qualification.»

that so many on here are so hostile to measurements is very strange to me, but I understand that sometimes defending our own perceptions is more important especially if we have big $$ invested... and I also am well aware that one can argue that our perceptions ARE our own personal reality, so...

it is also very strange that people complain about hostility on Amir’s site and yet are so hostile on THIS site.

sigh.

@curtdr This thread exists and in such a prolific form for a reason. I am not entirely sure why but there is a lot of history there. If Amir would just answer some basic questions, people wouldnt be so frustrated, including myself. 

"Amir, you kicked me off your "Audio Science" forum for being "too objective", because I insisted only valid listening tests mattered, not "SINAD" and "ETC" many of your cult worship. "

As your language here quite demonstrates, we banned you from ASR due to being the most obnoxious person I know on these forums.  Heaven knows how many people you have alienated from audio science with your hostile posting and attitude which conveying next to no knowledge. 

The above, and refusal to practice anything you preach to subjectivists was the reason we let you go.  When I asked you for blind tests of your speakers, your tap dance would have earned you a seat at Julliard.  Here is quick example:

 https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/what-do-listeners-prefer-for-small-room-acoustics.286/post-9179

"

amirm said:

Last I checked you [AJ/soundfield] don't do any blind acoustic tests either.

[AJ/Soundfiled:] For what conflicts with what objective evidence exactly Amir? What am I to blind test for specifically? Red Herrings?

As if that were not enough, you have now turned into speaker salesman looking to protect your pocketbook by appease to this membership. In a thread where people are attacking audio science, blind testing, engineering, etc. you are not only completely silent, but rather have a fight with me.  I say your transition to subjectivity is complete.  Thank heavens as we don't remotely want someone this miserable in our camp.

I once asked JJ (my chief audio architect and one of audio luminaries) about people like you.  He made this wise statement: "an unreasonable advocate is worst of both worlds!"   

It's pretty arrogant to think we know all there is to know about electromagnetism.

@laoman 

"Curt, I am certainly not against measurements. What I find absurd is to say that equipment that measures the same sounds the same. So many on Amir's site have said this."

No one has said this.  You all keep making stuff up and then complain about it.  Members frequently say the opposite.  That superlative measurements of something doesn't mean it sounds better than something with lesser performance.

"The fact is that there are some very rude people on ASR"

What a tone deaf comment to make.  In a thread with hostility shown from a dozen or more members toward me, your fellow audiophiles, audio science and engineer, you have the gall to talk about rudeness?  

We have very low tolerance for rudeness.  I just commented above how we let AJ go because he was so obnoxious.  It didn't matter that that he talked about objectivity.  

Yes, if you show up on ASR and make wild comments that you can't back, you will get strong pushback.  Get rude and we will show you the door. 

"It's pretty arrogant to think we know all there is to know about electromagnetism."

It is even more arrogant to think that because we don't know everything, we know nothing.  Your doctor diagnoses what is wrong with you without knowing "all there is" about human body.  Somehow for a hobby like this, you demand to know it all or else lets forget about it all....

"No one has said this. "
You seriously say this? I am calling you out on this. You clearly have no idea what is said on your own site. Do not come here and post crap.

All I have wanted answered from @amir_asr is how he can claim to allow Erin’s video, be open to the discussion, call something that innocuous click bait and then close the thread so no more information can be had from it.

I answered you already. You claimed I censored Erin's video in that thread.  I had not.  The thread was open for a long time and people said what they wanted.  You can still go and watch the video as many times as you like.  Heck, post it here and see what people think of it. The man said what his top 5 speakers are.  Go and post in his youtube comments what you think.  You have no cause of action to demand that I open that thread on ASR. 

He did not "demand you reopen it". Anyone who wants to see Amir’s real self can read the last post in that thread. As no doubt he will delete the thread, I have saved  his final post. What a piece of work.

Ahhhh-ha-hah-ha-ha!!...ughhh;  NO!!!!

Amir claimed he is right about the relation of measurements and audio perceived qualities by dogma and inquisitorial blind test and banishment of any subjectivist...

All the four physicists with their 4 articles are morons who know less in psycho-acoustic than him it seems ...Even the one designing high end audio systems and contradicting him...

Human hearings trained abilities are worthless and only Amir measuring gear test say all there is to say about gear experience and even in psycho-acoustic...

In the meantime not a word from him about the fact that human hearing beat the Fourier uncertainty barrier with his non linear methods in the time symmetry broken domain...What does it means that trained musician can extract information over this barrier up to 13 times in some case ?

Nothing for Amir, gear measuring tools say all there is to say about dac, amplifiers and audio experience...

As i said already, yes welcome to the measuring gear information and gear specs debunking, but suggesting that all subjective audiophile listenings is the same bullshit ready to be thrown in the same trash can because only measuring tools used by him is the ultimate truth this is going too far...

Human hearings, especially trained one are more trusty than measuring tools in many cases... Because the gear response to measures cannot either be read as always a warrant for audio qualities...

Anyway Amir do business not science...It is my opinion now...

Measuring gear is informative thanks for that ... All the inference made about hearings deduced from that are ideology not science ...

 When I asked you for blind tests of your speakers

Yes, in your blind rage you still can't say specifically what I am to blind test my speakers for/against, unlike your faked ABX test which were purportedly detection/difference tests for sampling/bits. Laughable that you post someone else's speaker preference tests, the kind you don't do!

Which is exactly what I'm proposing for PAF 2024, you taking a blind test administered by someone else where you can't game/fake it. I'd be happy to do a test of my speakers vs your Revels. Don't be scared ;-)

@amir_asr You did not read anything I wrote and you didn’t answer 🤣. I asked why you closed the thread. Closing the thread is in essence censoring the video because you’re butt hurt at anyone posting his content to your website. That post will now sink to the bottom and not be seen.

You just said if people are rude on ASR they are shown the door. Well you better show yourself the door. This was your comment on the top 5 discussion.

“Hate clickbait titles like that. It seems every second there is another like that. This whole monetization business drives creators to make so many of these.”

Hate is a strong word and it contributes nothing to the conversation about the speakers which was the topic, in a speaker subsection of your website. Your comment derailed the discussion and then you shut it down like people were acting out of line the responses defending him received way more likes than yours and you got into a huff.

People were rude in the other thread about AJs speakers which I think you let go on because you don’t like Soundfield or AJ. You never shut it down until it was too late and everyone was hostile. For the record I don’t have a dog in this fight, as I think that speaker search was suspect and I have a feeling was AJ trying to post his product on your website by some other member. I see both sides of this and how people can take advantage of forums to self promote. Erin’s video was not that. Doug Demuros car videos are put up on Reddit all the time and not removed because it adds another perspective and gets people talking on Reddit. All you are doing is alienating fans of yours by how you behave here. I was a fan up until this point.

I post on your website I won’t disclose my username because I don’t want retribution.

To repeat you did not answer me. Not on that question and you didn’t answer me on how much money you personally make for your business promoting your own reviews of products you sell on your website and forum.

 

 

Amir said "People who claim they should listen first and measure second, just have it wrong. They will then be giving you a random subjective opinion"

 

Yeah that’s me, no I have it right.

Apparently you want to be biased before listening. I thought blind testing was scientific?

It is completely backwards to know the measurements beforehand. it basically insures being biased. Bizarre. Not very logical and makes me lose respect for your methods.  

 

I am probably banned from ASR, not sure, but I’m banned from so many of these sites, I have lost count, lol! I actually consider it a badge of honor, because like most folk, I don’t always agree with the forum admins, and as such they pull the ‘holier than thou’ card and censor/ban anyone who has differing opinions, or goes against their little TOS. I was recently banned from the SH forum, as a mod( over there they have the temerity to consider themselves as ‘gort’s’) didn’t like a logical question I asked about selling some gear on their site, and then tried to make me beg his forgiveness to remain on the site;pathetic on a number of levels.

@daveyf Love it. Fight on

Message I saw scrawled on a Bathroom Wall:

DON'T FEED THE "Electrical Engineer by degree and hobby" EGO by engaging in Back and Forth dialogue. This is because, for the most part, you cannot appeal to an "Electrical Engineer by degree and hobby" through empathy and humanity – the EEBDAH deliberately wants to subjugate and antagonize you because they derive validation and gradification from it. So the only way to deal with them is to ignore them completely.

I think that measurements should be an important consideration, but in the right context. I am quite impressed by the measurements and explanations that JA gives to most of the Stereophile reviews. There have been some real eye openers in his measurement section that not only points to technical issues, but also, in some cases, to a general lack of quality in the piece under review. If one reads most of the reviews in that periodical, they are typically filled with hyperbole, and the reviewer hears nothing wrong at all. Yet, there have been several instances wherein JA has discovered problems that the potential consumer should be aware of. This is a valuable asset IMO. The problem I have with the 'less technically' able amateur who brings his measurements and concerns to the fore, either via his web portal or other means, is that these concerns have to be considered in regards to where they originated and the experience level ( along with the access to the appropriate testing equipment) that is evidenced. Most times the credentials really just are not there, but never questioned..

"Apparently you want to be biased before listening. I thought blind testing was scientific?"

Did you not watch the video I post?  It is entirely about this topic.  So no, I want to be informed when I perform listening tests.  People who are not informed and are not professionally trained, produce entirely unreliable results.  Here are the professional reviewers did: 

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2008/12/part-2-differences-in-performances-of.html

Look at the reliability of professional audio reviewers.  They are even worse than audio sales people! 

Again, this research along with much more detail is covered in my video.  I create those videos so I don't have to keep answering the same question over and over again:

https://youtu.be/_2cu7GGQZ1A

It is entirely wrong to assume that if you don't see measurements in sighted listening, you are generating more correct results.  You are still completely biased due to using your eyes and prior history to judge audio products.  And without the measurements to guide you, you are produce totally unreliable observations.  

Finally, the main reason for my listening tests of speakers and headphone is not just to give you an abstract impression of the product.  The purpose is to look at impairments found in the measurements and verify their audibility.  This cannot be done without seeing the measurements.  I post an earlier example in how I used frequency response of products to a) correct them with eq and b) provide that correction for all to use (and to verify my compensation).  Neither would be possible with simply listening.

I think that measurements should be an important consideration, but in the right context. I am quite impressed by the measurements and explanations that JA gives to most of the Stereophile reviews. 

JA's measurements are invaluable.  But you have to *very* careful about his conclusions.  In almost all cases, if the measurements dispute subjective results or company reputation, language is used to cover up all that is shown in the measurements.  Here is an example:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/luxman-sq-n150-integrated-amplifier-measurements

Let's start with his conclusion:

"As with other Luxman amplifiers I have looked at, the SQ-N150 is a tube design you don't have to make apologies for. It is well-engineered and offers excellent measured performance within its limited power envelope.—"

Let's look at that measured performance:

This is atrocious performance.  As soon as half a watt, distortion takes over from noise and rises massively as you go to higher power levels.

Here is the frequency response:

High output impedance means highly variable response that will change with load. 

There is not a single measurement in there that remotely comes close to showing proper engineering.  

Now here is my assessment of the identical amplifier:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/luxman-sq-n150-review-tube-amplifier.34964/

Look at at the FFT on top right showing copious amount of noise and distortion.  Combined, the SINAD lands at less than 50.  Putting that in perspective you get this:

It is the second worst amplifier I have ever measured! And I have measured over 200.

Multitone shows huge amount of intermodulation distortion which is going to stomp on any low level detail in your music:

None of that "grass" should be there.  What is left above it is just 7 to 11 bits of distortion-free range!!!

Here is my power vs distortion graph:

Notice how I show you two reference graphs in dashed lines: one with horrible performance and one that is superb.  You can instantly tell this amplifier in the former category.  JA's measurements didn't show this, right?

This is the my listening test results and conclusions:

"Luxman SQ-N150 Listening Tests
My lab speaker is an infinity R253 which has a sensitivity of 87 dB. I connected it to the SQ-N150 and started to listen. I had to immediately acknowledge the lack of power as the volume control not only maxed out but there was so much distortion as to cause crackling noise. I backed off to moderate listening level and the sound was OK but I noticed boominess in the lows as if you have more room modes than you do. To confirm, I switched to Topping PA5 amplifier on my bench and boominess was gone. Likely the harmonic distortion of the amplifier is hitting on more room modes causing extra bass/boominess. I can see if your speakers/setup lacks bass that you experience a bit more of it.

The volume control had to be kept below 12:00 o'clock. By 1:00 o'clock distortion would start to set in and sound would start to get grungy and rough. Past 2:00 o'clock it would be rather obvious and beyond that, unusable. There was usable volume with me sitting 5 feet from the single speaker. With two speakers you could double that but it is still not enough power for me with this speaker. If an audio reviewer can't hear this level of distortion, they should give up testing audio gear. Sadly none of the reviews I read made a remark about the distortion. 

It is the classic case of paying a lot more and getting a lot less fidelity and enjoyment.

Conclusions
The high level picture here is very clear: wonderful looking, and presumably well built amplifier. The problem is using tube technology and producing so little power. I see no advantage to it, euphonically or otherwise. But it is possible for some people the bass impact is a positive. But at what cost? So much spent with so little dynamic capability due to lack of power.

Needless to say I can't recommend the Luxman SQ-N150."

See the stark difference?  You didn't get what you said from JA.  He was highly diplomatic, hoping that few people would really understand his measurements to think otherwise.  But if they were, they would know what the reality was.

I can be direct and frank because a) I am not beholding to companies like this to send me product as owners already do and b) I am not able to hide what my much more clear graphs and measurements tell.

Better yet, we have a number of  highly skilled tube amplifier designers who commented in the review thread.  They were surprised how poorly this amplifier is designed.  Here is one of them: 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/luxman-sq-n150-review-tube-amplifier.34964/post-1219115

"The high second tells me that either the output stage is pretty unbalanced or the loading on the input 12AX7 is too low. Or both. The 10 dB difference between channels on 2nd suggests the former is a major factor.

My PP EL84 amp is in the 0.03-0.05% THD range at this power, and that was not optimized for lowest measured distortion. Lux can do better in this form factor and price point."

The problem I have with the 'less technically' able amateur who brings his measurements and concerns to the fore, either via his web portal or other means, is that these concerns have to be considered in regards to where they originated and the experience level ( along with the access to the appropriate testing equipment) that is evidenced. Most times the credentials really just are not there, but never questioned..

I sure hope given the fact that you have known me for years, that you are talking about someone else than me.  Here are my qualifications that are linked in my signature on every post on ASR Forum: 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-bit-about-your-host.1906/

If you were talking about me, take a look above and tell me what in there tells you I am not qualified to do what I do.  For now, until recently, my Audio Precision analyzer was newer than John's (I have an AP for 3 decades now!). My $100K klippel NFS speaker measurement system is hugely superior to JA's manual measurements.  I recently bought a $22000 reactive load to better stress test amplifiers.  All in all, I have probably $200,000 invested in measurement gear.  Combine this with decades of experience with analog, digital electronic design combined with signal processing, psychoacoustics, networking, computer technology, etc. and I say I know a few things in this domain.  :)

I am probably banned from ASR, not sure, but I’m banned from so many of these sites, I have lost count, lol! I actually consider it a badge of honor, because like most folk, I don’t always agree with the forum admins, and as such they pull the ‘holier than thou’ card and censor/ban anyone who has differing opinions, or goes against their little TOS. 

I seemed to recall you left on your own on ASR.  If you give me your alias there, i can look it up.

But do remember that I invited you back to WBF when I was the admin there.  You were reluctant to come back at first but I promised to take care of the issues you had as best as I could.  You came back but then quit when Myles came back to the forum.

With respect to ASR, most days I am engaged with people there who disagree with me.  It is so routine that I sometimes wonder why I do this!  Yet, almost all remain until they repeatedly get rude and obnoxious. 

@laoman 

"No one has said this. "
You seriously say this? I am calling you out on this. You clearly have no idea what is said on your own site. Do not come here and post crap.

You made a claim about what we say regarding measurements directly translating to better sound.  I challenged you and this is all you have to say?  That it must be true?  No, it isn't.  It seems every other day someone says the opposite.  Here is a thread from this week:

A SINAD of 80 or SINAD of 100 Can You Really Tell The Difference?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-sinad-of-80-or-sinad-of-100-can-you-really-tell-the-difference.45960/

First answer: "I very much doubt it. All the results I've seen indicate human ears are good for 70dB max, usually much less."

You claim I jump in there telling people better measurements = better sound after others say so.  You don't see me saying anything there.  The only "crap" here then are empty accusations you can't back.

@amir_asr 

Earlier today Amir basically claimed I was lying because I said his members claimed that Dacs that measured the same sound the same. He said"No one has said this. You all keep making stuff up and then complain about it."

It took me 2 minutes to find the following quotes:

However, the vast majority of DACs will sound the same.

Oh dear lord, DACs do not sound different. Please describe how you have tested these different sounding DACs. And please do not say I tested with my ears and I could hear the difference. That is I am sorry to say, just ridiculous and should never be typed on the Internet.

Firstly most all better DACs sound the same and people use their imaginations too much and believe all sorts of stuff is happening so be careful with other peoples’ DAC sound quality opinions. If there is a difference in sound quality and imaging and we are using the same DAC ICs then the only thing remaining that could affect the sound quality is the balanced/single ended input circuitry or the audio out circuitry which is basically the reversal of the input circuitry.

1) there’s no reason to believe they’d sound different in theory
2) there’s no evidence they sound different in practice
and therefore
3) no reason to speculate as to why they might sound different.

I think you are in the wrong forum. All DACs sound the same unless they are doing something really wrong.

Scientifically speaking DACs should sound the same.

Talk is cheap. Show us a double blind result where you can reliably make the difference between 2 recent dacs. We never saw a successful one. People are not able to differentiate between good amps, so for DACs no way. The differences are order of magnitude lower than what the human ears can differentiate. If you want to believe, that’s fine but you may not be on the correct forum.

Don’t beat yourself up over it. 99% of the people believe DACs all sound different because they heard it, read it in advertisements, watched/read reviews, were told by sellers or friends. A lot of ASR members belong to the small 1% of people that think/know otherwise.

So what is it Amir? There are 2 possibilities
1) You are not telling the truth or
2) You have no idea what your supporters post on your forum.

 

@laoman he won’t listen. @amir_asr you’re looking ignorant 

@amir_asr   I always post as DaveyF and that is how I was known on ASR. Nonetheless, I think your forum is a nice outlet for your views, and while I may agree with some (most?), I also know that there are too many folk there who are unable to get around the idea that measurements should be secondary to what one's ears are telling them. Whether you believe this or not, i am not sure.

Also, when I was on WBF, it became obvious ( albeit after you left) that there were a few 'guru's who wanted to use the forum as their personal soap box ( along with both of the owners) and that if anyone demurred, they were considered 'undesirable'! I did not leave after Myles came back; instead I was banned by one of the owners as he did not like my questioning of his favorite 'guru' and could not abide by the fact that someone might not like his 'sell to members' agenda! 

I understand that if one owns a forum, then one hopes that it will be a) potentially monetarily of value to the owner(s), b) a platform to get one's agenda and point of views across to a wider audience and c) attract like minded folk who will defend the owners value systems and beliefs.

Unfortunately, I am not one to go along with these trends....;0)

 

BTW, I was not specifically calling you out as an amateur, as i think you do have the experience you post, I just suspect that you are more into the 'science' than the music. There is nothing wrong with this in my books, it is just not where I come from. Reminds me of the time I was talking to one of the best known audio designers who confessed to me that he hated music, could not understand it and never listened to it, BUT enjoyed the technical electronic side of making amps, DAC's etc., It was an interesting conversation for me.

 

People were rude in the other thread about AJs speakers which I think you let go on because you don’t like Soundfield or AJ. You never shut it down until it was too late and everyone was hostile. For the record I don’t have a dog in this fight, as I think that speaker search was suspect and I have a feeling was AJ trying to post his product on your website by some other member.

The first part is obvious, the latter is outright slander. I had no clue who MKR was until he contacted me after reading this https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/opinion/1762-the-best-of-florida-international-audio-expo-2023 , like anyone reading the internet could. Which was well into his months long speakers search. Actually I was overwhelmed with interest after that article, which had zero to do with any thread on ASR. I'm a small manufacturer always at maximum capacity, I can't handle more orders or interest like the type from ASR. That's a complete BS insinuation you made, essentially calling MKR a shill. He's a real person, like Duke Lejeune, who has known MKR (his real initials) for decades. I don't advertise and don't need to use shills. Unlike many like yourself, I don't hide behind an online pseudonym. I use my real name/initials/company and exhibit publicly all the time.

You claim I jump in there telling people better measurements = better sound after others say so.  You don't see me saying anything there. 

Exactly! There was a perfect opportunity to clearly state that most of your measurements fall well below audibility thresholds AND, even if they are perceptible, there is no clear evidence one is preferred over another. You do ZERO valid listening tests. Yet you not only "Rank', but routinely "Not recommend" products based solely on measurements with zero listening test correlation.

Of course your house of cards collapses if you preferred a "higher distortion" not recommended DAC over a top ranked SINAD champ one in an administered by someone else listening test. Or hear no difference at all.

You are the exact opposite of someone like Toole. Amusing when folks even in this thread, say they only buy stuff based on your Pied Piper recommendations ;-).

How about an Amir DAC blind test at PAF not run by Amir, with no view of real time analyzers?