You go @amir_asr ! Taking em down like John Wick!
Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?
It’s easy to make snide remarks like “yes- I do the opposite of what he says.” And in some respects I agree, but if you do that, this is just going to be taken down. So I’m asking a serious question. Has ASR actually changed your opinion on anything? For me, I would say 2 things. I am a conservatory-trained musician and I do trust my ears. But ASR has reminded me to double check my opinions on a piece of gear to make sure I’m not imagining improvements. Not to get into double blind testing, but just to keep in mind that the brain can be fooled and make doubly sure that I’m hearing what I think I’m hearing. The second is power conditioning. I went from an expensive box back to my wiremold and I really don’t think I can hear a difference. I think that now that I understand the engineering behind AC use in an audio component, I am not convinced that power conditioning affects the component output. I think.
So please resist the urge to pile on. I think this could be a worthwhile discussion if that’s possible anymore. I hope it is.
1,423 responses
Nope. But he has confirmed that audiophile may tend to evangelize their personal subjective v. objective frame of reference. Measurements are helpful, but rooms, room treatment (or not), equipment, cables (an endless discussion of)... are important. Each audiophile "hears" what he/she likes and at some point, isn't that the issue? Which is why I love Hans Beekhuyzen's sign-off comment on every YouTube, "...and whatever you do, enjoy the music." Too often, I've found myself deep into these "debates" and arguments... vs. how much time am I actively listening to my set up, my music? |
I wasn't trying to make a point. Someone quoted me from a different thread - about S/PDIF - in this thread, and I clarified. It was off-topic; I should have not responded.
|
| Post removed |
Sure. Make sure you conduct such listening tests with rigor and report back. Don't tell me you like the story from the guy who designed something. That is putting your trust in the hands of the wrong person. Here is a story for you. Read what happened when Dr. Olive arrived at Harman: http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html " A Blind Versus Sighted Loudspeaker Experiment This question was tested in 1994, shortly after I joined Harman International as Manager of Subjective Evaluation [1]. My mission was to introduce formalized, double-blind product testing at Harman. To my surprise, this mandate met rather strong opposition from some of the more entrenched marketing, sales and engineering staff who felt that, as trained audio professionals, they were immune from the influence of sighted biases. [...] The mean loudspeaker ratings and 95% confidence intervals are plotted in Figure 1 for both sighted and blind tests. The sighted tests produced a significant increase in preference ratings for the larger, more expensive loudspeakers G and D. (note: G and D were identical loudspeakers except with different cross-overs, voiced ostensibly for differences in German and Northern European tastes, respectively. The negligible perceptual differences between loudspeakers G and D found in this test resulted in the creation of a single loudspeaker SKU for all of Europe, and the demise of an engineer who specialized in the lost art of German speaker voicing). So be very careful in believing what a designer claims. And once more, listening tests are wonderful. Demand that your supplier show such controlled listening tests. If they don't have one, clearly they are not valuing listening as you say. Instead they want you to be believe written words with no verification. Caveat Emptor!!!
|
Sure. Go to Similarweb.com and create an account. Then you get get this kind of statistics for any website you want: ASR is the top line in navy color. Orange is this site. And teal at the bottom is stereophile.com. ASR is far newer site by far yet we have overtaken both and created a huge gap. It is proof point that vast number of your fellow audiophiles see the value in ASR and visit it. |
amir_asr" ASR has had an incredible growth now being neck and neck for top audio site on the Internet." |
We live in an era where men decrease themselves smaller than their tools, calling it progress and the new norm, in ancient times it was called idolatry : obsession with some tools transformed in new gods... Myself i try to think by myself, and i am allergic to cults, ideology and groups...
In philosophy we differentiate the means and the ends without confusing them... |
You are always upside down... You know nothing about psycho-physics it seems... or better said, you dont want to know... Because it will destuct your Fourier linear and time independant ideology...
The human ears dont listen abstract measures, but in the time domain the ears brain non linearly decode information so complex none of your tools can describe it...It is not measured in decibels, or in hertz... Etc... it is called Qualities... these qualities are investigated RIGOROUSLY in psycho-acoustic for example in the work of Oppenheim and Magnasco , you never commented about and i posted it 5 times.. We listen music, speech and natural sounds and we RECOGNIZE them we dont listen to level of distortion and we dont perceive it in isolation as your tools can in their linear and time independant way ... You listen to your tools first , we listen music first ... But read Hans Van Maanen... Debunk him... if you are able to debunk him... And i invite your audio disciples to read him too... Explain to me where he is wrong...Go and do it... His work in speakers and amplifier design called " temporal coherence" because it is founded on psycho-acoustic hearing basics... Not on Fourier linear and time independant tools as your debunking tools ... The tools you use to debunk... He use other tools measuring scheme to DESIGN his own works in amplification and speakers after studying psycho-acoustic real discoveries about hearing.. You may convince yourself that using these linear time independant tools will give you hints about "transparency" as you call your fetish acoustic concept...But timbre accuracy and musical sense live in the time domain and are more fundamental because they are determined more by the ears acoustic than by electronic chip well "measured" by you and well scored by you ... Measuring Dac is one thing... Measuring amplifier another things, and measuring speakers another things... as you know already for sure ... BUT measuring all that at the end is BY THE EARS/BRAIN not by Tools working linearly in the time independant domain...designing business is not debunking business at all ....
|
@amir_asr WTF are you even saying. Don't twist my words around. I didn't say that. No I dont agree. You never answered me. Why are those threads allowed but that one is closed? Show me where the answer is. You are delusional. |
Your site is well designed and Interesting Amir... I appreciate design and observations from various corners.. The fact that it draw many people talented in audio dont surprize me... It does not means that your basic measuring and debunking philosophy is right... In audio, in medecine as in politic, unanimous crowds are most of the times deluded...Ideology and technology are not science at all... It is not simple matter to understand something... Especially basic audio debunking ... basic medecine debunking and basic geopolitic debunking ... Imagine psycho-acoustic debunking now ?
«My tool are better than your ears, it is simple , they measure distortion at level that you even never will dream to detect » -- Groucho Marx audio engineer 🤓 |
His ears? Why on earth should I trust his ears? What training and qualifications does he have when it comes to his hearing? Can he hear to 20 khz? What level of noise and distortion can he hear? Is he not influenced by wanting his own product to sound better? But let's say all of that is true. Don't you think we should verify? If a manufacturer says their amplifier has incredibly low noise, don't you think we can measure that? What it he says it produces 200 watts; should we not verify that? Let's look at an example in the form of Bob Carver. Many people are his fans and think he has incredible abilities just like you are vouching for your hero designer: Carver Crimson 275 Review (Tube Amp)https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/carver-crimson-275-review-tube-amp.29971/ It sadly is a noise and distortion factory: But let's put that aside. As the name indicates, the amplifier is supposed to produce 275 watts. This is what it did instead: Yup it blew its fuse after just producing 29 watts!!! I replaced the fuse and tested again: Even burst power to the right produces 75 watts, far short of of claimed 275 watts. At 20 Hz, power drops to just 14 watts: And look at the level of distortion, it is off the charts! You see the power of measurements? We are able to reliably and convincingly show that the famous Bob Carver who could do no wrong, indeed and done a lot wrong. He had misled his customers by a mile. And I say this sadly as someone who bought his receiver back in 1982! I suggest you put less trust in people's claims and seek out independent analysis of audio technology. This is what your fellow audiophiles are doing. Resist the temptation to ignore science and engineering where it can generate so much useful information. |
Knock on wood, you are absolutely wrong on this. ASR has had an incredible growth now being neck and neck for top audio site on the Internet. Your fellow audiophiles see the value that the site brings. Top people in the industry and luminaries in audio science and engineering are regular members and add incredible amount of value to the site. And of course there are almost daily reviews of new products. I tested a new Arendal speaker which I posted today that the company had sent me. At the end of the day think what you are doing for your fellow audiophiles. I am doing my part to bring people together and have robust discussion of audio science and engineering together with new data on daily basis. If what floats your boat is rude arguments like this, then, yes, we are not for you. Or your fellow posters with similar angst. |
So you finally agree that the information was there courtesy of ASR and all this time you had other intentions as opposed to merits of having that thread open. This much was obvious but was to get that out of you, albeit after repeated questioning.
|
@laoman the level of gaslighting is monumental. |
amir_asr"Nothing you quoted says those DACs measure the same. " |
@rowlocktrysail fully agree. I love objectively good audio equipment. It’s a bit like ice cream. Yeah I can measure the ingredients and ratios to know it’s ice cream and not yogurt but some taste better than the others. The study of the mind is still indeed science but it’s not as exacting as say electrical engineering. And yes speakers are electric signals into acoustic ones but we measure ultimately what’s good via a subjective device. |
Today's measurement tools, as advanced as they may be, often fail to fully capture the subjective listening experience. In my view, the most reliable way to evaluate audio equipment is through actual listening. While ASR and its measurements can be interesting and entertaining, I consider them more of a pastime when I have the time to spare. Ultimately, our own ears and personal experiences hold the key to determining what sounds good to us. So, while measurements have their place, I prioritize the subjective listening experience as the ultimate judge of audio quality. |
You answer is upside down again...
You are so lost you did not even understand my point... But i cannot rival Dr. Van Maanen explanation.. I will take your hand ,Read me: measures in INNOVATIVE amplifier design are GUIDED by the designer EARS and psycho-acoustic fact to realize more musical design ... As Van Maanen do... And the point is that the use of Fourier method ,in electronic design and with this specific measuring tools, had a psycho-acoustic cost , the Fourier tools are linear and time-independant... Human hearings and musical sense come from non linear ears structure and non linear reading in the TIME-dependant domain... Then if in the way we design our amplifier we dont take these facts into account, then our amplifier will not sound "musical"... It is why many piece of gear you measured perfect can sound non-musical at all for many listeners ... Amir you SERVE YOUR TOOL , the goal is that the tool must serve the designer... But you DEBUNK with your tools, you dont DESIGN amplifier, as Van Maanen did... It is the reason why yourself with more, way more deeper experience than me in audio, you dont understand this basic psycho-acoustic facts...and you read anything UPSIDE DOWN... I learned it myself thanks to you, because i reacted to your arrogant dismissal of human hearings as FIRST RULER in audio, instead you put the MEASURING FOURIER TOOL as first ruler .... It is the reverse for a designer, knowing that the ears/brain use non linear time dependant methods the measures are used IN THE DESIGNING PROCESS ITSELF to serve better the pleasure of the human hearings not to be on the optimal spot of the measuring dials or graphs for some debunking work ... Do you catch where you are lost and why ? Van Maanen will teach you the technicalities... Myself i am not in your field and you cannot take me seriously... Except if you read Van Maanen and the meaning of Oppenheim and Magnasco experiments... Thanks for your patience with me... |
Yes, it does. Thanks for sharing your point of view. However, It also exposes what might be missing for some discriminating listeners. Your reply explains your approach, and the type of characteristics you listen for. It clarifies what’s important to you. This is helpful in surfacing differences in translation and expectations by some other listeners who look for something more in what they hear and listen for - in completely different ways. That’s okay, just different means of approach. In your words, you are listening for "distortion", "any differences", "brightness", "artifacts no longer there". Helpful, yet a more generic description overall. --------------------------------------- GAPS / DIFFERENCES in descriptions: Some other critical listeners are looking for different descriptions, using different vocabulary, to convey a different type of listening experience. None of it is being measured or reported on your graphs for the PNW show report on your website. Again all just words. People seem to be speaking using different descriptions. And, will likely continue to disagree about what’s important to them using different words. More personal descriptions by some listeners, might use words and ranges to describe how much of any of these type of "artifacts" exists, such as "Texture, sound stage, depth, presence, layering, balanced, bassy, lean, sibilant, transparent, clarity, clean, clear, open, detailed, etched, quality, warm or warmth, veiled, 3D, engaging vocals, bumped mid-bass, lush midrange..." All subject to interpretation of course. Don’t kill the messenger, just sharing words and different things others look for, to learn more, aside from measures and graphs. Many can argue there are no trustworthy measures for this type of data being represented, or for showing on graphs. Very different audio science camps and forum listeners reporting it differently. For what its worth, or simply disregard. :)
|
Eff it. Here is the video. Would love to hear if others agree with Amir that this is clickbait. I found it informative. More than happy to give Erin more views. |
@amir_asr Didnt see the question and I still dont but I, unlike you, will answer. I dont need to post it. The thread has been linked many times on here and this post is about you and your practices. Can you please point me to you answering me why you took Erin’s post down?WHY ARE THOSE ALLOWED TO REMAIN UP BUT THE TOP 5 NEEDS TO BE SHUT DOWN? Put up or...I wonder how many times Amir has been wrong ever. I am guessing close to zero. |
it take me 2 year to design my room and tune it... I was in sonic paradise at no cost.. I loose it and music too in an abrupt way... I was very sad and depressed, but you know it is NOTHING, compared to what fate do to others... Anyway i tell you that because you can know how i was feeling and why without any audio system nor music i did not came back for 10 months... I came back here, because this fateful loss was a turn of luck... I studied my headphone 6 months non stop , did 6 modifications, and believe it or not it rival my room in his own way and improve on it on bass and high frequencies... The K340 is an electrostatic with a dynamic driver... I even study the patent of Dr. Gorike to understand what i nmust do to improve it...It is the first headphone i love, i dislike all other 9 one ...So much it is the reason why many years ago i come back to speakers but this time experimenting with acoustic... I was so excited by my sucess with the K340 i came back here ... I like most people here, even if we disagree... I like discussion.. I miss my students... Thanks for your kindness ...
|
I give members wide latitude to post what they want even if it is linking to monetized content. This is why Erin's content was allowed to be posted and still remains to this day. You didn't answer me: why are you not posting Erin's video here and discussing it?
|
That is not what we do with the tool. The tool gives you data. A human interprets it against psychoacoustics research which is based on listening. And what is the alternative? Not measuring? Then how do you know your listening tests are accurate? Just because you say so? I can get 10 audiophiles and get 10 different answers as to the impressions of a speaker. One guy likes Wilson and the other Magico. How do you know who is right? Answer is that you don't. You are relying on ad-hoc evaluations devoid of the very science you mention. This is all demonstrated and fully documented in peer review research. So nothing I am telling you is my opinion. |
@amir_asr Humor me and show me where you answered why you took down the thread? Simply because it’s a YouTube video and you don’t let creators benefit from ASR traffic? Why is this one allowed then? And this one Annnnd this one How are all of these allowed but that one is not? Just look at how many likes someone defending Erin got compared to yours. Even your own users don’t agree with you on this one. Your feelings got hurt and you took it out on the thread. How objective of you! I couldn’t care less how much money you make, and I have no interest in running an audio website so no I think me projecting is way off base. |
It is the reality unfortunately. Take video production. It has strict standard for luma and chroma (black and white and color information). Content is created using that standard. So as long as you calibrate your display to the same, you get the identical colors as was seen by people who reproduced the content. This has enabled displays to become incredibly accurate in the last few years. In sharp contrast, no one knows the tonality of anything produced in creation of music. That brightness in music may be part of it, your may bey our speaker. You don't know. Dr. Toole calls it circle of confusion. I call it "broken architecture." Here is a survey Genelec did of their customers in high end production suites (for film sound): See the incredible variations? And this is with Genelec speakers where each unit is measured and fully calibrated to neutral when manufactured. There is some hope here. As long as we all rally around neutral speakers, then we can reduce the level of confusion and lack of consistency. This is slowly happening as even low cost speakers are striving for this now. Sadly, many high-end speakers go their own way with at times abominable tonality. |
Amir you are completely lost...😊 Discussing with you enlightened me a lot ... I must thank you for that sincerely... But you dont understand the relation between psycho-acoustic of human hearing and amplifier design nor the relation with music...If i can see that myself being in no way a specialist in this audio matter anybody reading a true scientist as Hans Van Maanen will see it in an hour.. I posts many articles and even an hour video of him... If you dare to listen the video and read the papers of Hans Van Maanen , he will explain it better than me...
The system will not react the same to sine wave or to a variable dynamic strong burst of music sorry...You forgot that you implicitly supposed that the tools you use with the Fourier method as background for hearing theory are truthful to human hearings but tthis is FALSE and they are not truthful to human hearings ... Hans Van Maanen dont design amplifier the way you measure them he explain way... Study it if you look for truth... But if you read it your ASR is dead as it was with the measurements you used as SCRIPTURES absolute truth... If i can understand it in one hour anybody can... Any ASR member reading Hans Van Maanen will be lost for you... But the most important is that the tool you use to measure a design are not appropriate to the human hearings pasycho-acoustic basic science and not even appropriate to amplifier design... You must listen and read Hans Van Maanen... He is not a clown if you read his bio and what he do.... his explanations are so clear anybody can read it , even you... You are lost in tour technology... This physicist will explain it to you or to anybody of ASR reading my post if he dare to read Van Maanen... I am no more surprized now about the reason why you did not comment about this extraordinary experiments by Oppenhein and Magnasco... i learned a lot researching about your post and methods and why uour are completely wrong... i will not repeat Hans Van Maanen... anybody reading him and what you claim will debunk you easily if he was well versed in audio.... I dont think you will read my "verbose" arguments,... You have a blind spot easy to identify: Electronic audio components mus be designed for human EARS not for the measuring tools practice... WHY ? Because your tools and the way you use it put you the head down and the feet over for PRECISE PSYCHO_ACOUSTIC FACT you dont rexcognize, because recognizing them will destruct your ASR site...you act as a sellers not as a scientist... You did not responded to psycho-acoustics arguments and you cannot see the link with amplifier design and the FLAWS related to your fourier tools and linear time dependant measure in a domain , where non linearities and time dependant RULE.... Hans Van Maanen explain it, and i ask to anybody to read him... He designed speakers and amplifiers and is a succesful physicist in field related to acoustic mathemahically... You cannot dismiss it as a clown sorry... I am not a scientist but i can read and undertand text...and i am not afraid of equations..
A distortion do not exist if we dont have a reference point to begin with , from which the distortion will be described as a negative pertrubation or as a positive addition, the DIFFERENCE will depend if you use a linear time independant tool as your first and last gesture OR the non linear time dependant ears/brain as your first and last gesture ... Alas! you live in a techno babble where psycho-acoustic facts about human hearings means LESS FOR YOU than the results of your measuring tools... They are these tools USELESS to determine what is GOOD SOUND...I am sure you are desinterested and not motivated by money thyough, but by your ideology... Thanks to you i understand that better now... |
There is no "per usual" here. You are taking shots at my reputation with reckless abandon. Reason is obvious: you are projecting. That if you were in my shoes you would put making money ahead of serving a community with high ethics. Makes sense. Many people are hungry for money that way and let that cloud their judgements. But I am the exception. I have been fortunate enough to have had a successful career and the rewards I seek through this work are not monetary. When walking around Pacific Audio Fest a week ago, I could believe the number of people who a) recognized me and b) said how helpful my work has been in the way it has opened their eye to truth in audio. They have saved money and getting better performance to boot. If I wanted to make money from my activities, I could flip a couple of switches and easily bring in $100K in revenue without even trying. ASR forum has 2+ million visitors a month which is three times more than stereophile.com! ASR youtube channel has 40K subscribers. I am choosing to not go there to keep the type of accusations you are making at bay. It doesn't work when someone has a different agenda though so here we are. And no, I did not say "I sell speakers from traffic of ASR." I said in a handful of occasions, people have come to us to buy some speakers. The few dollars there are a drop in the bucket of what Madrona makes. And frankly, it is business that my team rather not have. The opportunity cost of handling sales of a speaker is quite high for us. They do it because I ask them.
I have answered you multiple times. The thread was open long past the time I said it was a clickbait. As to it being laughable, all of a sudden you don't care about people making money from their videos. As long as you think you can score a point in an argument, all is well now. So think what you want. I am not here to keep answering people who don't want to listen. |
"Ultimately we don't know how a recording is supposed to sound like."
Such an unprepossessing sentence and yet one that threatens to undermine the entire audiophile industry. If anyone is so affected I apologize for drawing attention to it.
I'm also sorry to hear of your loss. I hope it wasn't as traumatic as it sounds. |
Thanks prof... I must apologize to you because i thought that your questions was a sarcasmm My only excuse was that someone, a seller of "tweaks" who did not like my homemade no cost experiments mock my for many days... I take off the photos because i add a new system... More economical... But more performant because my speakers so good they were did not go under 30 herts as my actual headphone... I was very sad loosing my room and house and quit audiogon, because i did not have anything to spoke about... I came back after my 6 monhths of optimization of the K340... I as astounded and no more sad.,.. T?hanks for your kind words... We may differ of opinion but you are a gentleman...
|
@amir_asr If you think Purite Audio and Siberg and others arent on your site so they can promote their product, you are delusional. How is that different? Purite is constantly commenting negatively on gear he doesnt stock for gear he does. Siberg is an actual company and they are in essence promoting their design in plain sight. How is that different? |
@soundfield why no review from Erin yet? |
@amir_asr you have some splaining to do |
Erin is a LOT closer, has Klippel NFS and is far more knowledgeable, especially since he has experienced my speakers himself and would thus not be utterly confused by the variable directivity and diffuse, delayed indirect radiation measurements, as Amir would. Amir is too much of an egomaniac to ask someone he knows who understands exactly what I'm doing, JJ..Amir developed Blue Screen as an MS middle manager. He has no clue about this stuff. See my link above. Btw, I do full measurements myself and anyone who has bought my speakers has access if/when needed. |
This is laughable projection, everyone on internet can read your "skill" here: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/establishing-differences-by-the-10-volume-method.1136745/ It's comedy gold Amir:
Your projections are fun stuff ;-). You have never ever posted a blind test not administered by yourself. That's why I'm proposing you do one at PAF, administered by others, then posted on Youtube. Instant classic 😄 |
@amir_asr, precisely.
As first hand personal experience (son / musician / music lover) proves this to be factual. For I’ve tested his audio fidelity limitations and my conclusion always stands … Clearly one who enjoys better fidelity playback however, in the pursuit (insert various levels) which we / all strive for is of very little interest or concern.
|
Per usual you not pick the one thing I didn’t mean literally. I didn’t mean brick and mortar in the sense you sell speakers out of a store front I meant more it’s a physical service and product you sell. Still I’m dubious you’ve never made money off it. You did buy your own admission say that you sell speakers from traffic you get on your website. @amir_asr I’ve lost count at this point how many times you’ve avoided answering me. Last time I will ask. Why did you close down the thread for the top 5 if you don’t care about money? A thread you torpedoed. It was going fine until you said you “hate” clickbait titles which is a laughable label. @soundfield I’ve got an idea. You send Amir a set of speakers to measure and he submits to a listening test. Trade.
|
@prof measurements together with proper listening tests - I have zero issues with that. But I won’t be beating a dead horse. |
It wildly varies depending on class of product. On say, a power tweak, I listen for any difference regardless of what it is. If I can distinguish it from not using the tweak, then that is major news by itself. For testing of distortion, it is best to hear it exaggerated first, and then dial it back. So if you have a low power/high distortion amplifier, first crank it way up and hear the distortion clearly. Then back down the volume control and see at what point that same artifact is no longer there. For things like speakers, single speaker testing doesn't make sense. Ultimately we don't know how a recoding is supposed to sound like. Research relies on paring at least 4 speakers together and compare them. That way, the bad speaker will stand out as an exception to the rest. Such tests are outside of the means of most audiophiles but a few have tried as I linked to yesterday. In all cases, deep knowledge of what you are testing, including measurements, is a great help to focus your listening tests. This is very important in hearing lossy compression artifacts for example. Back to speaker (and headphone listening), selection of content is paramount. You want broad spectrum content that is mostly invariant. That is, it doesn't keep changing. That way you can do comparisons without the content itself changing on you. This is incredibly helpful when I am developing EQ filters to correct response errors. I want to be able to turn the filter on and off and hear the effect. But if the content changes from dumbs to vocals and then the piano, I can't do this. Something very useful in testing lower powered amplifiers and speakers/headphones is to have a mix of bass and high frequencies. This way, when the bass notes come and demand power, you can listen to not only how they get distorted by the impact on the rest of the spectrum (e.g. brightness as a result of too much harmonic distortion). Another key is to stick to the same set of tracks and only use them no matter how tired you get listening to them! You learn what parts of them are revealing, saving you time and effort. Throwing a new random piece of music at every new piece of audio you are testing as some reviewers do, is just wrong. Hopefully this at least partially answers your question. :) |
I’ve tried SS amps in my system over the years, most recently the Bryston 4B3, and I have always ultimately preferred my CJs. I enjoy the slightly cleaner sound of my Benchmark SS preamp sometimes vs the CJ tube preamp...but then again often prefer the CJ preamp. (I actually did a blind test between them, just out of curiosity). My view is that ultimately the level of distortion we are talking about in, say, my CJ tube amps vs a Topping or Benchmark amp, are quite low. There’s no "incredible revelation of detail" from some of the best measuring solid state amplification even compared to my old tube amps. With the tube amps it’s more of a slightly different presentation of details, vs one being "way more revealing" than another. Of course being an audiophile means obsessing over the tiniest sonic differences. That’s what makes us kooks vs the general public :-) So I use the tube amps because even if the audible difference is very subtle in the big picture, it’s a subtlety that is subjectively significant for me. But I certainly think it’s a great thing for people like Amir to get measurements out there so an audiophile who wishes to can use that information. An audiophile who is seeking accuracy isn’t going to choose my tube amps over a Topping, and knowing measurements can help ensure he knows what he’s getting.
|
@prof nice setup! I had Benchmark DAC 3 HGC it was nice but I liked the Bricasti M3 better. I’m just kidding…chillax…. |
I don't care about the traffic or more users at the cost of setting a precedence that you can use our audience for commercial purposes. You seem to not understand the concept of having core principles that you stick to. I suggest you move on. |
We are not "brick and mortar." Madrona is has an office space and we rarely if ever meet with customers there. Our typical customer is an ultra high net worth individual who has no idea what or who ASR is. Or care one bit about this hobby. I don't recall a single instance of someone from ASR asking us to handle their custom project. Part of the reason is that Madrona just doesn't do smaller projects. There are some customers of Madrona by the way who also read and appreciate ASR. But they predate my creation of ASR Forum. There may also be customers we have gotten as a result of my reputation/ASR work but without my personal knowledge. 2-channel audio is just not our thing at Madrona. It is a cut-throat business and something we don't know how to do so we don't go after it. Kudos to other companies who know how to make a living out of it. We sell one lighting system and the cost can be as much as $100,000! We know how to do that. We don't know how how to sell a Wilson speaker for the same amount. I suggest you cut back on these accusations. It is totally improper to keep making things up that has to do with my reputation based on what is "improbable" to you. Not everyone does things in this industry because they want to make money. Learn that and move on. |
FWIW, my system: Joseph Audio Perspective 2 Graphene speakers Thiel 2.7 Speakers. (I’ve owned or used plenty of speakers, from MBL, to various ,Audio Physic, Von Schweikert, Waveform, Hales, Harbeth, Spendor and many others, but I’ve pruned down my collection). Conrad Johnson Premier 12 monoblocks CJ Premier 16LS2 preamp Benchmark LA4 preamp Benchmark DAC2L Bluenode music server (ripped lossless CDs/Tidal) Transrotor Fat Bob S turntable/Acoustic Solid 12" arm/Benz Micro Ebony L cartridge. JE Audio HP10 phono stage. Degritter Ultra Sonic record cleaner. Listening room was re-constructed with the input of a professional acoustician. Sounds amazing. Hope that helps your curiosity :-)
|
Well, if you did, you think your system will refuse to play it? It doesn't know the difference between that sine wave or music, right? So if it screws up sine wave, it reasons that it also screws up music. BTW, I test with many other signals. I already showed you multitone: If you listen to this signal, it will actually sound like organ music. You see that "bad stuff?" Measurements are telling you that they are stomping on your low level detail. |