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.
Translation:
All the best, |
I did. Massively so. We helped him create his channel by giving him access to huge number of visitors. I even helped him get his Klippel system up and running and calibrate his measurements against a speaker I had tested. Once he got rolling this is how he finished his reviews:
A single post like that will get you banned on any forum, audio or otherwise. It didn't on ASR but we did warn him repeatedly that he should not do this. But he continued in various ways to pull traffic from us his site/channel with advertising, etc. Eventually this came to a head, and he was banned. Alas, after he got his painful divorce, I unbanned him and he remains so as I type this. Members constantly link to and post his reviews/website. There is no more "courtesy" to be had to offer him. There are no parallels between the above and my posting here. I am not creating new threads and posting links and pleading with money as Erin was doing. The membership here decided to create a thread specifically discussing ASR. Accusations are made against me/ASR which are disputed with factual quoting from ASR. Links to ASR are not commercialized with sponsored links, advertising, etc. Knock on wood, ASR is larger than audiogon unlike the hugely reversed situation with Erin. So while he badly needed us to get started and collect money, we are in no such situation.
|
As I have repeated explained, speakers have been tested using countless controlled listening tests. Measurements were then made that correlate with the preferences of those listeners. Whatever listening abilities those humans had, came into account in this research. You said you read Dr. Toole's book so you should know all of this. With other gear, when we test humans, they routinely can't replicate their sighted claims of fidelity in blind tests. Therefore, there is little that is real that needs to be investigated. If anything, I am your champion as evidenced by me showing that small impairments can be heard. You need to come to my defense when I post such data, not continue to complain. :) |
Agree it is time to close this thread. Although, it does demonstrate a crystal clear difference between Audiogon and ASR. ASR would never have allowed a similar exchange. A parting suggestion before this thread might disappear. Go back and carefully read recent posts from @kevn. Very thoughtful, reasoned and accurate analysis. |
I am astounded by the amount of prof take as good arguments... Hearing theories and their link to the design practice ... No value for prof... Amir did not even adress that he called that "philosophy" when i spoke about it and when Van Maanen write about it he called that, leaflet of marketing with no value ...He does not even try to understand the content... Everybody can look for himself with the link above...... The difference between abstracts Fourier map of frequencies, amplitude and phase and duration compared to concrete subjective ears/brain evaluation in the time domain and non linearly extracted from natural sound sources... No value for prof parotting Amir here ... The fact that it is psycho-acoustic research now that drive audio industry no more the basic traditional gear design from edison to the first tube amp and the first S.S. amplifier and the first modern microphones in the boom after the war , because the industry being mature now, the great innovation comes from dac psycho-acoustic technology improving and mature now, but also from the like of Choueri virtual room acoustic , using positively and not eliminating as Amir do the subjective ears/brain specificities ( HTRF measures and specific inner ears comb filters measures to increase the musical experience by the fine tuning of his BACCH filters application for each subjective listener using his subjective characteristic com-pletelt instead of rejecting them ) Choueri did the exact opposite of Amir, to increase the experience he used and measure each specific aspects of subject hearing DIFFERENT abilities and his room too and speakers... Amir reject all subjective ears/brain aspects as mere illusions or artefacts . he promoted only a small set of electrical measure as REAL FACTOR of sound qualities, except some room measures but he does not advise for small room acoustic (sic)... Is it not incredible ? All that has No value as argument for prof parotting Amir here... The fact that even hearing impairment studies need experiments in a natural environment not just in a laboratory with Fourier maps around what is called ECOLOGICAL HEARING THEORY , this is no value for prof parotting Amir... The fact that serious designer even here in Audiogon , not just Van Maanen, use harmonics ( distortion positive control) to ease the way the ears/brain perceive sound qualities , it is of no value for prof parotting Amir whose circle of zealots purist ignorant called that MARKETING for audiophiles (idiots) .. Incredible arrogance and educated stupidity... The fact that any trained classical musician or acoustician , or mature lover of music as i am one, can judge an audio system by analysing rise and decay of piano notes , the rise and decay of cymbals ( a perfect SIGN for analysing the way the audio system work in time control because the concentric decay of a strucked cymbals increasing as a slow circle before vanishing is better than a Fourier map analysis and way more shorter to analyse ) the bass evaluation with turkish drum or gong , and the organ bassier note rendition , the rise of the higher note of the violin and his decay time etc, all that are IMMEDIATELY revelatory of an audio design better than few electrical measures from the linear Fourier window of a circuit behaviour, but it is of no value for Prof parotting Amir... it is incredible the knowledge of prof and Amir...they are able to predict everything about audio qualities with few set of electrical measures... Indeed it is exactly what Amir sell to gullible consumers.. His method as catechism... They know something , and they know better than me on many audio points for sure, but their misunderstanding of the BASIC psycho-acoustic theory and applications is stunning... They really think that techno cultism is science and replace concrete listening experience and the only possible experiment is with the few tools of Amir... Amir bragged about predicting cymbal harmonious decay or the timbre of a violin by measuring an amplifier and connecting it with speakers in a room with no acoustic...No doubt any acoustician can go to sleep now and any recording engineer too, any classical or jazz musicians, they dont know what transparency is, Amir know with his electrical tools... i am astounded and dumbfounded... i had been unable to discuss anything here anybody can verify that Amir produce no argument against my essential point NONE ... Oppenheim and Magnasco experiment no value for prof at all, parotting Amir... And prof say naively that he is even attacked on ASR by defending something about the hearing subjectivity...Incredible... imagine a naive designer audiophile how it will be treated ? i know because i read many pages of dialogue between an expert designer and some Amir groupies... this designer is more a saint that i am for sure... it seems we can have a diploma at low price now... In my time 1963, i studied latin and old greek english too ( but i did not pass my graduation in english 😊 and i struggle with Latin theme writing ) we learned anyway how to read any text and commented it at 13 years old... now it seems that education dont exist. only SPECIALIZATION with empty programmable students.... i say all that because i am stunned by this level of ignorance... i am not an engineer in audio ... And i am able to win easily an argument, so much high is the level of ignorance in techno cultism ...
|
Closing this thread is an error... this thread can inform everybody about his marketing ways..... It is the only place where Amir debated with evident sign of ignorance because challenged seriously , ignorance about psycho-acoustic and ignorance of any solid arguments ... He drown the fish with his tools analysis reviews one after the other as ARGUMENTS... Subjectivity must be eliminated by blind test and never used in the design process... It is the opposite of craftmanship design based on psycho-acoustic ... Anybody can read the arguments and see there is no serious understanding of psycho-acoustic behind Amir defense of his small set of tools... The measure he takes are useful to know but cannot predict audible musical qualities from the gear... The gear must be paired synergetically in an acoustic room and reviewed by experienced listeners and the designers himself...
|
| Post removed |
Dont close this thread... It will be useful for others to read .... They at least will learn that there is many hearing theories not just one... They will learn that it is not a small electrical set of measures that is the center of audio but psycho-acoustic... They will learn About the results of Magnasco and Oppenheim captivating experiment... they will learn something... There is not much to learn in many threads... Some people hate Amir... This is stupid.... Amir is a market seller and very polite... i learned a lot with this thread... Am i the only one learning here ? 😊 it seems so.... those who learned something can manifest and say what they learn ... No bullshit please... It is an I. Q. test not a contest in hate...😉😊 Way more interesting than a blind test to know if a cymbal decay is good or not ...
|
@texbychoice just read @kevn musings and I think you are right. Very well said. I have learned from @mahgister too, so I agree it would be a pity to close this. People needs to see who Amir is warts and all, and it certainly helped me identify my own biases. @kevn you really write well and I love your meditation on audio |
Very good mapman... You are even right... The problem is that some called "distortion" a bad name something that is used to ease the Ears/brain working when listening music... second and third hamonics are not distortion in a negative sense it is a positive tool based in acoustic... Some designer use them for long time ago... In S. S. or tube amplification... Distortion must be CONTROLLED not always eliminated or masked... but i am not an electronic engineer ... I will shut myself here... As said Amir i am a philosopher... 😊 It is not false... Even if for him it is almost an insult... For me it is not at all... 😁😊😎
|
Thanks... I appreciated Kevn too... and your posts too... one thing is sure for me, even if Amir is more a market seller than a scientist, he is a gentleman... then we must condemn hateful posts... As i said many times i welcome his measures... Not the zealots around him parotting his dogma for the worst... I invite everyone to read Toole discussion and Dr Choueri discussion on ASR... There is no competition between ASR and audiogon... To much different sites...
|
Legend has it Medusa wasn’t so bad when you added some distortion. Furthermore in more recent times, detail-obscuring low pass filters are used all the time to take that edge off extremely beautiful female models. I’ve seen some AI generated beauties and I strongly suspect some serious distortion might have been tossed in there just to keep people in suspense. It’s really getting out of control. |
A short dialogue from ASR... ( a cartoonish dialogue, a fiction not too much far from reality )
« ASR zealot : I dont know about the cymbal decay time and the brush rustle sound time envelope , i must use my tools to analyse the recording ... ---why dont you use your ears? ASR zealot : i have nobody to supervise the blind test in a correct way... As you know the ears are dubious... ----How do you know if your analysis will reveal less about your audio system and more about the recording itself and what about if your system is not in a good room or if your system is not really so good ? Are your tools able to gave you everything about all factors of transparency : the recording trade off ? the audio system parts ? the audio system synergy ? the audio system with no acoustic optimization ? or the same audio system in a well controlled acoustic room ? you never use your ears first to differentiate all these factors? ASR zealot : No need, a well behaved component measured for his linear behaviour is all there is to know... Hearing delude us in a way an oscilloscope cannot. i always listen to confirm my oscilloscope lecture.. My acuity is so good that i am always synchonized with it... ----I understand, but if the cymbal decay is not good , perhaps it is a bad file, or a bad recording technic which was used, or perhaps a bad component, or perhaps a bad synergy between them , or perhaps a bad room ? And perhaps your ears defect ? ASR zealot : no problem i dont use my ears much because of their biases anyway...But i pass very hard to pass acuity test with success.. ----And you will write a review with this recording anyway only if you are able to measure the amplifier or the speakers and use blind test with a few reviewers, is this so ? ASR zealot : yes... --- But suppose the recording engineer was not so good especially for the cymbal part even if the measured speakers or the measured amplifiers are measured as good with a linear behaviour what about the recording engineer fault for the cause of the lack in transparency... ASR zealot : you dont understand the method... All audible qualities are illusory or subjective anyway, even transparency... What matter is the OBJECTIVE blind test results for our readers and the measured specs of the amplifier ... --- Then you will go on with the amplifier review ? ASR zealot : yes... transparency of the amplifier will be measured... not the recording technique..And the amplifier will be objectively measured and confirmed by blind test ---- Then the choice of the recording and of the room did not matter at the end ? Asr zealot : what matter is objective measuring science... Room acoustic is a market superstition... Well measured speakers dont need a room, they will do well in any room .. ---- If even transparency is subjective as the end result , the only real objective factor is measuring tool ? ASR zealot : yes...our role is to explain to each consumers they cannot trust any non verified by us gear component, they cannot trust their ears either...The measures is the objective level of transparency... --- you are then the only hope to tame the audio jungle market ? ASR zealot: this is why we exist... Law and order... --- But psycho-acoustic experiment just demonstrated that the Fourier linear time independant mapping based models of hearing is wrong , the way our ears/brain work had no direct relation with our tools ? ASR zealot : it is the reverse ,the experiment demonstrated that our ears cannot be trusted, i precisely stated to you that our ears cannot be trusted , even mine with top tested acuity, and this experiment by Oppenheim and Magnasco confirm it completely... The tool behave well linearly in a predictive way, the ears dont work in this way.. Only our set of linear tools verify each market component and can say something objective about sound quality... the ears works as a pair of uncontrolled horses ... our tools are the necessary blinders to tame and trained them in the right direction ... Our ears work bad non linearly as a bad impredictable circuit and dont obey science, mathematic is time independant unlike our poor hearing.. Psycho-acoustic study hearing only to replace it by A. I. which will be an improvement ...You dont seems to understand science ? You are a philosopher no ?
|
Yeah I’m in the camp now of leaving it up. Amir wants this to be deleted. He spammed this thread and now is praising the moderators. Hey @amir_asr you still haven’t answered why you used to not level match! |
So much frothing and veins popping out on foreheads! Mahgister, you win the prize my friend! Your outpourings are truly epic and everything I have come to expect from the golden-ear brigade. And you call an ASR member a zealot? Take a look in the mirror! The only reason to remove this thread would be because it's hacking over so much diatribe that's gone on between the objective and subjective side of audio reproduction on HiFi systems ad nauseum for decades. The fact is that you are either using your equipment to listen to music or using music to listen to your equipment. Personally I'm from the former camp. I enjoy music and have listened to it on a range of gear from very expensive to downright poverty spec and do you know what? Every time I listen to something I like, it's still the thing I like. It's not a live performance and no conventionally produced recording can match that. The reason it can't match it is the amount of processes the recording passes through on its way to being a finished product. Subsequently, its a moot point as to what combination of expensive audio gear can come the closest to reproducing a live performance, none of it can. I recently started a discussion about speakers on ASR and my assertion was that the search for the "perfect" speaker was a pointless exercise. To back this up, I illustrated the broad range of speaker designs and design philosophy, not to mention materials and electronics. There is such variety in this technology that to declare one the "best" in not practical or honest. As many have pointed out here, it comes down to your personal experience and what you think is best, nobody else's . Personally, I'm really happy with the Q Audio speakers I just picked up for $275 and the little Class D Bluetooth amp I hooked up to them mainly because I just want a nice, room filling sound, not loud not impressive, just nice to listen to music with. I did some research, mainly on the speakers and for the money, they looked ideal for my purposes. The amp, well I just followed the latest chip tech and tried not to buy an amp with something obsolete inside it. I used a cut up shaver cord for speaker cables and paired the rig to my phone to listen to my Spotify playlists. That's it, nice, simple, cheap, sounds good, no distortion (that I can perceive) and now I have the music I like in my living room. Happy. |
Yes of course his acolytes will head in sand defend the emperor, ignoring all facts like he both knows what he’s testing, has the knowledge and means to measure/analyze the difference in signals with the equipment he is pictured with, has confessed to having cheated by cranking low level/silence, etc, etc, etc. Never mind the long history of fabricating tests aka the AVS link. All that it to be ignored, in the name of science, you know. Wanna bet he can’t repeat the feat proctored and unable to cheat, like at PAF 24? Or more likely avoids any proctored test at all. |
I'm saying you can't tell them apart without the cheating you've both admitted to and denied simultaneously. The latter, about the now measurements guru/former Microsoft exec Amir being unable to measure the difference between bit depth/noise floor/etc.of computer files, even manipulated, is comical. Not quite this level https://www.avsforum.com/threads/establishing-differences-by-the-10-volume-method.1136745/page-21#post-16385934 I don't care what Kevn believes, you are the one posting the gamed Foobar ABX files as retroactive bragging rights after the AVS debacle above. This is exactly the type of test I'm proposing for PAF 24, that you take and demonstrate ability to detect difference between 16/44 and Hi rez...but without any of your analyzer gear around and being proctored/overseen for the first time, i.e. not allowed to crank silence etc methods of cheating. I already know you are going to use the Salons are too heavy excuse, so which Revels are suffice vs a garage speaker? I have Revels too. |
Lots of stones thrown in glasshouses all around. calling a ASR member zealot is just plain stupid and counterproductive. They actually have their beliefs anchored to something, a foundation, vs no anchor at all of the “it is all in the ears” people, which isn’t even remotely factual. It is all in your brain, not your ears. But hey, facts never stopped the anti ASR crew before! |
i am misunderstood completely by the two of you ..Sorry,... I never called all ASR members zealots... Dr Choueri and Toole discussed there among others respectable people...I even invited people here to go and read there interesting discussions .. VERIFY... i called zealots on ASR techno SOME babbling people, SOME techno objectivist groupies, because there is some as there is also insulting idiots here, I see some zealots attacking an experienced designer on ASR because of their ignorant zeal they ACCUSED him of designing "distortion" full product to "golden ears"...Incredible arrogance and ignorance together...They are zealots there as there exist idiots here ... I called "idiots" those who insulted Amir here REMEMBER ? They even invited me to shut down my discussion ... Read my posts... i submitted more than 12 articles by 4 physicists and one geologist... And one acoustician... I debated Amir with very precise argument from the 3 articles by MaGNASCO and Oppenheim because my main argument was there...No answer from him about this article save a remark disparaging his content as a mere secondary uninteresting or meaningless acuity test ... VERIFY... I THANKS Amir 16 or 17 times for his set of measures as more than welcome ..Some idiots dont liked that at all... I did not accepted though his claim about predicting ANYTHING about audible qualities from a finite set of measures on the gear ... ( his concept of "transparency" testing and his transparency concept apply to software file not to acoustic listening experience with all interfering aspects from the recording to the room acoustic ) Confusing the lenght of my posts and my clumsiness in english syntax with my alleged ZEAL, when i was winning with deep argument over some zealots of ASR or some idiots here insulting Amir, calling me a zealot is PREPOSTEROUS: I will repeat my criticism from the first post i put here on this thread till today The audio market condioned people to buy gear and focus on gear component, they sell them by the specs they bragged for or by the "musicality" they bragged for, Anyway the division between "subjectivist" and "objectivist" has his roots there in this PAVLOVIAN CONDITIONINGof the attention ON THE GEAR PIECE... The main and real focus in audio, the attention , the scientific aspect of audio must be centered on ACOUSTIC AND PSYCHO-ACOUSTIC science , there is no objectivist and no subjectivist in psycho-acoustic methods...There they take the HEARING SUBJECTIVITY SERIOUSLY , they studied it experimentaly to understand this deep mystery, they dont eliminate subjectivity systematically by blind test and they dont negate his power as delusions or artefacts or illusions even if there is for sure...In the opposite they used subjectivity power and they even proved it to exist.. There is no gear objectivist in psycho-acoustic because they MEASURE all aspect on the controlled environment and all aspects of hearing to understand and APPLIED it to new design or to help with hearing impairments in natural environment experiments.. Then i am not a zealot , a zealot means someone pertaining to an ideology, objectivist measuring ideology or subjectivist listening "naieveté"; my focus is in acoustic training and psycho-acoustic learning... Then i dont like to be called "zealot" by mistake or misunderstanding... Call my posts too long and bad written , this is a FACT... but try yourself in a better english to convey all these complexities and answers in short posts of a few line... It is IMPOSSIBLE...
|
In my discussion with students for 40 years i discovered that lesser mind are unable to distinguish and separate the meaningful and meaningless aspects between two quarrelling side using historical and epistemological CONTEXTS to go on a subtle deeper and longer road OVER the two partial sides...
The great American polymath scientist, chemist, mathematician and logician and probably the greateast american philosopher, founder of pragmatism , Charles Sanders Peirce, say that Hell is binary and Heaven ternary; he founded alone modern semiotics with this joke about graphs and trees ... 😊 |
