Excellent! We’ll talk some more in the future I’m sure.
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
If someone tells me I’ve said something "fallacious," I don’t take that as a put down. They are doing me a service -- helping direct me to what is false. Because I prefer not to believe or claim false things. @amir_asr then goes to explain why it is fallacious. Those who interpret this as a personal attack just prove Amir’s point that some here are not interested in facts. (You don't agree with his argument that it's fallacious? Fine. Then rebut him. But don't take it personally.) @painter24 simply and plainly described a personal preference for musical enjoyment. A statement having nothing to do with measurements or Amir. The use of "fallacious" by Amir was completely in the wrong. No false things to discuss or correct. @painter24 expressed a preference, just like saying Red is my favorite color. The "fallacious" comment by Amir and your defense of same completely miss the point being made by @painter24. Amir and your behavior, treating everyone as deserving some kind of re-education is arrogant. |
@ the measurements is everything crowd…riddle me this… Your rich uncle dies. He had an awesome stereo with two dacs - a Topping D90SE that he used to stream from Tidal (MQA), and an Audio Research DAC-9 that he used for Qobuz. His widow calls you and says kid, in his will, your uncle had left you one DAC and you can only take one. Topping D90SE:
Audio Research DAC-9:
You’re walking out of that house with one DAC and one DAC only…which one and why?
P.S. @mahgister I actually wrote a long post…I know…hypocrite…but bare with me here for 💩 s and giggles… |
@audphile1 : the ARC DAC of course. But…. with a twist: grab the ARC, sell it to gullible & deluded (or is it fallacious now, as the Master named them?) audiophile. Buy the Topping DAC brand new with a small portion of the sale proceeds. Save a lot of money, with which you can buy a lot of measurement gadgets. Measure away all your heart wants! 😉 |
@thyname good one hahaha |
You are not hypocrite but very kind toward me because my posts are heavier, much long, and less easy for anybody trying to catch the essence of the matter...Sorry... Thanks anyway ...😊 The audio research, i think i will pick ( price tag means nothing but i am human ) ...
My position is i appreciate Amir analysis... But as information added i welcome it .. I dont like for sure to be told lesson about my hearings impression by some techno-cultist... And i dont think that suggesting as i did to tune a room by our faillible and biases ears is in any way "fallacious"...it is economical and it is what we may call real learning...
«My perfect mother created his imperfect son because she said there is something more in it»--Groucho Marx 🤓 |
@amir_asr you say you are one of the most open minded people yet you shut down a thread about Erins audio corner because you said the title was clickbait and people dissenting caused you to throw a hissy fit. thread in question I have not once heard you say in your responses here, how you could do things better or where you fell short. That is why you are vilified here and Erin is beloved. you have no modesty and you can't even witness it. |
Whoa, Amir, is that you??? I had no idea you still ventured outside of your reformation kingdom! Most folks here won't know we are half brothers and go back decades. How are you my friend?
I almost spewed coffee out my nose reading this. I bet no one here or on Amirs Science Review knows about this old classic: Establishing Differences By The +/- 10% Volume Method 😉. Really glad you've come around on this. Presumably the new, reformed Amir is the real Guru now? Btw, checked your Madrona site and another classic is still there! Glad you're keeping Bona fides with the hear this, that and the other crowd too. Take care man. p.s. you going to be at PAF next year too? I might come visit you and JJ |
@texbychoice Well, since the posts in questions have apparently been deleted, I cannot go back and show you that there was a claim at issue. I would not have agreed with the use of the word "fallacious" if a mere preference was at stake. Not because that's necessarily insulting, but because it's a category mistake. If I say red is my favorite color, and someone says that's fallacious, either I'm wrong about my own preferences (which is impossible) or what that person has said is nonsense -- a category mistake. That's why I thought that a factual claim was at issue. |
I think Amir and ASR do a wonderful job dispelling audio myths spread by the industry to make sales of useless snake oil products. I especially like his systematic debunking of cable mania. Personally I would never buy anything that wasn’t on his recommended list. On the other hand, if people here enjoy audio products for purely subjective reasons why not? That’s their personal aesthetic and they are happy. But objective Science is important and cannot be brushed off as an invalid criterion. |
For me, ASR is a useful tool. If I am contemplating a purchase, I will see if he has measured the device. I really don't take his listening recommendations to heart. I don’t trust his ears. I do trust his opinions of the measured performance. Ultimately, my own ears determine whether a device takes residence in my system. But I surely don't want to purchase poorly engineered product. |
Check out this measurement base review of MoFi SourcePoint speakers. Like ASR, Erin also uses a Klippel’s Near-Field Scanner. I can’t say Erin "changed my mind" because I wasn’t planning on buying these speakers. I learned that these speakers must be towed in or out for a neutral sound presentation. If I were to recommend these speakers, I’d have to bring up that caveat. |
If it measures the same, it sounds the same. Golden ears do not exist, human hearing capability is the same, just the brain that creates differences when none exist. Blind testing proves that? So anybody go through the Harman process to become a trained listener? I have. What is the point of becoming a trained listener if measurements reveal how a product will sound? Measurements are important to reveal major flaws. Listening completes the evaluation. As Dr. Floyd Toole said "Two ears and a brain respond very differently to a complex sound field and are much more analytical, than an omni-directional mic and analyzer." Is Dr. Toole wrong? |
Amir really needs to respond to this along with why he shuts down discussions on his forum he doesnt like? Ridiculous |
Ever seen Highlander? There can be only one. In the case of Amirs kingdom ASR, there can't be 2 Supreme Leaders. Especially with another fancy Klippel NFS! Btw, yes, Erin is the nicest guy in person. Hopefully Amir goes to PAF next year. |
Floyd Toole is right...
The central problem in audio science and experience are first and last psycho-acoustic problem...Not gear analysis problem...
Psycho-acoustic use human subjectivity as a TOOL but also as en END , because psycho-acoustic study hearing as a real phenomenon not as a tool for gear debunking matter...
Debunking as Amir does the audio industry claims by verifying them is a welcome enterprise... As i said and i had no problem with that it is a service for all ...
But going further , as some Amir followers does, using techno-materialism to claim that qualities dont exist in a real world but are only "illusions" created by the brain is a simplistic stance, which is not true at all... Perceived qualities, even if illusions exist too, are real and all the craft of acoustic is based on trained acoustic experience and experiments...
The goal of audio experience is then training our perception , not mainly and only to debunk illusions, but to train ourself in acoustic environment,...
Sound sources put in vibration reveal their real qualities to our ears/brain IF WE TRAIN IT : Their densities, their composition ( wood, skin, metal, iron glaqss etc) their inside ( empty or full with single hole or multiple one of different size or not , with apertures etc ) their qualities as fruit ripeness or not or weight of the object as a delicate woman walk sounds impressions or a big dude etc... We can even echolocate our navigation as bats and dolphins do, many blind peiople teach it in the world... The voices analysis of the answers incoming from a person to another reveal much to consciousness as to unconsciousness...In musical and acoustic context the analysis of "timbre" perception experience by a subject imply 5 factors among which there is not only spectral envelope but also time envelope etc and these factors are not determined by the mere electrical characteristic of the gear, but by specific acoustic conditions in the room and location of the listener , his training status, and specific ears structure etc ....
Then we cannot reduce all listenings impressions to be illusions because they dont appear in some electrical tool ... Subjectivity in acoustic is not treated as something to be ALWAYS eliminated but something that must be put under control and trained... Biases in psycho-acoustic are not only negative factor to be erased if not controlled for some study sake but also they positive motivations the scientist must understand for their own sake in other kind of studies for example in hearing aids technology ...
The vibrating sound sources are then real and their qualities perceived are real too...The vibrating pattern in the air is decoded by the brain in a way science is in the ongoing process to understand... The story is not completed...
How someone can analyse with electrical tools the complex frequencies spectral distribution in space and time of a qualitative information perceived by some brain ? It is possible for some aspects of the experience, but it is not possible for all aspects for a specific listener...
It is impossible using electrical tools used in electronical design check-up or reparation to assess that what is perceived and does not appear is only illusions...Some acoustic phenomenan are room dependant and gear dependant and specific trained ear dependant, it is not a pretense for owning "golden ears" , it is a description of the complex facts of the matter which some people arrogantly simplify.. ...
Then it is only ideology not science and real experience who make people arrogant enough to reject any perceiving experience not measured by electrical tools as illusions...
But read me right, when Amir verify with his tools the designer claims he does a great service ... When people reading him goes further accusing everyone of FALSEHOOD who learn how to hear a difference in any sound qualitative phenomena related to acoustic complex specific conditions ( speakers/room/ears coupled together ) they goes too far...
I will repeat myself here: subjectivist and objectivist put the focus on the gear as the market has conditioned them for decades to do ... This is not even wrong to do it, this is misleadinng and created quarrel between two opposite sides who fail to see the main problem : how to learn to listen in acoustic experimental conditions homemade or in a LABORATORY... The gear choice picked by listening taste or by measured standards is SECONDARY...Learning acoustic and basic psycho-acoustic is the tool and the goal...
|
Most rigorous double-blind listening tests include training. They don't so much train you to listen as they do train to know what to listen for. In a way, they "teach to the test." Typically, trained listeners are better able to distinguish differences in blind testing. Setting up a true, valid, double-blind listening test is much more work than many audiophiles acknowledge. So when manufacturers go to the trouble of doing this testing, they want to have meaningful data at the end of the day. |
Nope. My ears convey the truth than measurements ever did. Case in point....Amir tested the MHDT Pagoda DAC and apparently according to him it was the worst measuring dac he has ever tested. Yet, in a side by side comparison with two of the dacs in his top measuring tier the Pagoda in my system sounded significantly better and more lifelike to my ears. I sold the other dacs and kept the kept the Pagoda until I got my current dac...the schiit "less is more" version of the yggdrasil which is simply amazing. |
Yes. Amir has reinforced some of my views for sure. Mainly about the absolute absurdity of exotic power cables and the mind boggling pricing of them. He's also confirmed some opinions held by people I trust, specifically sound engineers. Most importantly he's opened my eyes to some new products that I otherwise would have ignored. I work in an industry that is parallel to the world of sound recording and reproduction. In my field, there is raging debate as to what camera is best, what lens is sharper and what format is most appropriate. All of these factors can be measured but choices are guided by having a good overall understanding of all the parameters including the perception of others. It's not that different in the audio world. I've been interested in audiophilia for most of my life. I love the exotic engineering excesses of it. But I am acutely aware of the spurious claims made by some manufacturers and the "law of diminishing returns" with regard to some engineering approaches. He is a thoughtful and interesting person who just provides objective, comparative test results of equipment, based on relevant criteria. That he attracts so much vitriol is baffling to me. I get he might ruffles feathers, but that is why he is interesting. I'll continue to read ASR with considerable interest. |
Amir is interesting, I think he does a lot of good in providing tons of data at no cost, especially in the realm of speaker measurements. However, I find his tone condescending and I do not appreciate how he treats others. His attitude towards Erin has been baffling since their first interaction. I hoped he would mellow out and adopt a more humble persona over time but that does not seem to be in the cards. He clearly views any feedback or suggestions on improvement as an attack. I've learned a lot reading ASR, especially with regards to making electrical measurements at home with high performance ADCs. I find ASR attracts people who value similar things to me (tied with DIY Audio) and I especially enjoy helping others. However, I feel a bit ashamed to participate given Amir's attitude / behavior. The closure of the thread discussing Erin's recent video (but not before Amir got in two final attacks) being a prime example. Michael |
Paul Barton, of PSB, worked with Toole, Harmon and others back in the day of speaker testing. Check out Darko's interview with him. Worth a listen. Lots of people like to name drop the audio greats and then go on to reengineer their methods of testing while hoping no one catches on or knows better on just how to do it, fancying themselves as being oh, so, scientific. Paul pointed out that when doing the first round of speaker testing (1/2 hours worth), the tests were thrown out the window due to the fact that the people were listening to the room and not the speakers. Evaluations were all over the place. It's why one has a better chance on getting their ears around a speaker in the confines of their own listening room. It tool at least half an hour for their hearing to settle down before they could go back in and when they did, the very same speakers in the very same room sounded completely different and there was more consensus on what sounded good to them. Their hearing had adjusted to the room and not the speakers. Our ears adapt to a changing environment enough so that with enough time, we can better understand what we hear. We do it automatically when the change isn't that great but we still do adjust. Some call it second nature. What bugs me the most is that those who do the name dropping know damn well the facts I just stated if they have, indeed, looked into these speaker tests and conveniently left out those salient facts, relying on ignorance to carry the day. All the best, |
"So you see, when I fallaciously sit down, kick back, throw some tunes on, I'm not really thinking graphs, charts, measurements, or how I can be saved from nasty audio manufacturers. " First, thank you for that heartfelt story. I am so sad to hear you about your blood disorder especially when found during that period. I can't possibly put myself in your shoes and imagine what it must be like for yourself, and work conditions you had to deal with. On the above quote, please allow me to say that we in the other camp absolutely do the same thing. Despite our differences, we all share the love for music and what it brings to our lives. None of us are thinking about graphs or anything when listening to wonderful music that moves us. As audiophiles though, as opposed to just music lovers, we also have a second passion and that is chasing equipment that best optimizes that experience. It is in that process that we differ. When it comes to purchasing something new, we seek out objective and reliable data such as measurements, prior research, engineering knowledge, etc. It is then that we look at said "graphs." Graphs teach us about the incredible technology that is behind what we just turn on and listen. We also sense betrayal when casual and incorrect subjective assessments get us to spend tons of money on things that absolutely do nothing for the sound of our system. But serve to bias us enough to then go and tell others they are gifts to audiophiles in how they "remove veils, lower noise floor, blacker backgrounds, faster bass, etc." You can't fault hundreds of thousands of your fellow audiophiles to see value in this. And certainly not shame them by implying that they must think of graphs when enjoying music. On the other hand, you have many fellow subjectivist audiophiles who are constantly worrying whether the most innocent thing in your system is impacting the sound. I know audiophiles who experimented with the cover and screw for their outlets and arrived at the conclusion that yet another veil was removed when those were upgraded. Clearly they are not just sitting back with confidence we have on the objectivist side that none of this matters and our systems are performant. So please, please, please, don't make stereotypes of us the way you are doing with the implication that we don't listen to music but just look at graphs. This accusation is made all the time by subjectivists who don't like measurements. It is untrue, and unkind to the Nth degree.
|
"As Dr. Floyd Toole said "Two ears and a brain respond very differently to a complex sound field and are much more analytical, than an omni-directional mic and analyzer." Is Dr. Toole wrong?" He is absolutely right when it comes to acoustic measurements above transition frequencies of a few hundred hertz. Each ear hears something different due to wavelength of audio becoming smaller relative to the size of our head and torso. The brain then gets involved to adjudicate what the net summary is of the two differing signals from each ear. I have spent weeks of my life literally across multiple forums explaining this including the last drawn out battle in a recent thread on ASR. From my first post there: "2. He is optimizing for his eyes, not ears. Two ears and a brain don't work like a single microphone and a graph as Dr. Toole would again say. The notion that reflections are "bad" is folklore as comprehensive peer reviewed has repeatedly shown. Yet, it has become one of the "internet rules" to chase them using measurements. Doing so will lead to a completely dead room when you are done. Ask any high-end acoustician what the #1 problem with DIY acoustic is and they tell you people creating dead rooms because of this mistake." We are not discussing acoustic measurements here. We are talking about everything leading up to and including speakers. Dr. Toole has dedicated his life in correlating measurements of speakers to good sound. The culminated in a major standard in the form of ANSR/CTA/CEA-2034 which I follow when posting measurements of speakers. Alas, that correlation of measurements to speaker sound is about 70 to 80% predictive. To wit, I have liked speakers that didn't measure that well, and disliked some that did. It could be that my subjective assessments are wrong. Or that we are hitting on less known (e.g. role of directivity in preference). When you go upstream of the speaker though, you will see 100% agreement from Dr. Toole on measurements speaking the truth on whether something is performant or even functional. You don't see anything in Dr. Toole's book about screwing around with cables, power conditioners, etc. So I would not bring in his name in this context. |
"Yes my new opinion is he is a measurementophile not an audiophile. We should’ve be talking about him in these forums." Well, I don't know what your old opinion was but the new one couldn't be more wrong. As I have said here, listening tests are more valuable than measurements. The hitch is, you have to do them in controlled manner with statistical rigor. That is time consuming and frankly, not always fun to do. So we resort to not only measurements but also science and engineering of audio. Combine all of this and you get powerful evidence of whether something makes a difference to fidelity and if so, what that impact might be. Go and do random test and all you generate is noise, not data. |
Ask any high-end acoustician what the #1 problem with DIY acoustic is and they tell you people creating dead rooms because of this mistake."
Sometimes you are far better off doing nothing than doing something.
I was sorry to read your reaction to Erin's latest video. For sure there was some clickbait involved but Erin's list was just a bit of fun considering he's not really reviewed that many models so far. I still tend to see his channel more as a complimentary one to yours rather than as a direct rival. It might also be worth remembering that some of the most factually accurate and informative channels ever on YouTube also have a pitifully small number of subscribers.
However, as you rightly say Amir, you are the host of the ASR website and it's your decision. |
Yes, I think Amir is thoughtful (as in deliberate) and whether he’s interesting or not is a personal choice. But objective? What makes you think he’s objective? He’s one of the most biased people who posts here. Assigning numbers to something is itself no proof of objectivity. I think Amir is a self-promoting measurementalist, and his outbursts here are at odds with his claim to logic and reason. |
"Paul Barton, of PSB, worked with Toole, Harmon and others back in the day of speaker testing. Check out Darko's interview with him. Worth a listen. Lots of people like to name drop the audio greats and then go on to reengineer their methods of testing while hoping no one catches on or knows better on just how to do it, fancying themselves as being oh, so, scientific. Paul pointed out that when doing the first round of speaker testing (1/2 hours worth), the tests were thrown out the window due to the fact that the people were listening to the room and not the speakers. Evaluations were all over the place. It's why one has a better chance on getting their ears around a speaker in the confines of their own listening room." That is NOT at all what he said. He is talking about adaptation or how we can "hear through a room." This adaptation takes a few minutes so people in controlled tests needs to be allowed to acclimate a bit. He said nothing whatsoever about "confines of their own listening room." You made that up. Here are some bits I transcribed: ---------------- "Before you were introduced to dr. toole were you designing by ear.. Yes, I was designing based on early days ..... pink noise listening to it and music... when I took the first speaker to Ottawa [at NRC], there were clearly things that could be improved based on theory that speaker is a window.... flat frequency response and dispersion are all a factor." "[measurements at NRC] put a microscope on what I was doing... correlating measurements with listener preference." 1. Most of the people most of the time agree on relative quality of a group of loudspeaker. There is no personal taste when it comes to asking what sounds the most natural. That is the goal to make the recording exactly the musician intended. 2. Properly interpreted set of objective measurements correlate strongly with listener preferences. You can see the measurements and predict how listeners will prefer. [3] Musical tastes and experience is not material. When listeners go into the room, it will take a few minutes for listeners to adjust to the acoustics of the room. After that, they are able to sort out the speakers from room. We did both stereo and mono listening.... did the same experiment in mono and stereo (double blind)...when testing in stereo the anchor [bad speaker] got better in stereo because stereo masks tonal aspects of a speaker. You get better differentiation between sonic differences of speakers in mono than stereo. Most of stereo imaging we hear is in the recording, not the room. The final tuning is done by ear, i.e. ratio of highs to lows. Darko summarizing: "95% is done with measurements last bit is done by ear." Tuning is still done using measurements. Subjecting himself to double blind as he tweaks. "We can measure everything... but the scale of it you judge by ear." ----- So yes, people need to listen to that podcast. It is wonderful and fascinating to see how Darko's mind is shifting toward objective side of things. |
There is no controversy... Measuring gear performance is a good thing, and interesting, especially if someone can falsify audio conmpanies claim...But thats all...Thanks Amir... But once this is said, we learn how to listen only in OUR ROOM, with acoustic experiments...( not by upgrades according to our "tastes" by the way, ) Tuning a room is a long process, incremental one, and has nothing to do with the comparison of two cables or amplifiers according to our " taste" or according to their specs verified ... Give me any relatively good system i will make a room able to serve it well... Then gear choice is a secondary matter compared to acoustic and psycho-acoustic... As Amir said it himself , objectivist and subjectivist focus on gear choice and design, but he did not say in his zeal to convert subjectivists to gear measures falsification that they forget doing so the hugely more powerful acoustic embeddings in the room... And the best amplifier in the world will not cancel mechanical control of vibrations nor electrical high noise floor of the house nor the acoustical bad content of the room ... Also in our room listening music we are not in a laboratory...We create an acoustic to serve our neurological hearing biases...we learn basic acoustic in the process...Blind test is accessory as gear choice is acessory ... There is controversy ONLY if an objectivist want to convert a subjectivist, and only if a subjectivist dont understand that the gear components of his "tasteful choice" so important they are , anyway are secondary to the acoustic embeddings for a full satisfying experience...If not, he will NEVER experience the full potential S.Q. of his gear... Its my experience... Instead of trying to convert people or instead of refusing to read information measures chart, forget the gear for a month ; people must think about acoustic to LEARN HOW TO LISTEN and then to learn how to be able to embed their system properly in the electrical, acoustical and mechanical dimension... Subjectivist and objectivist act sometimes fanatically... No acoustician on earth is a subjectivist or an objectivist...They dont mind about specific gear piece, they tought about their optimal acoustic embeddings...
«Crocodiles had tastes and act accordingly , acoustician had not» -- Anonymus acoustician 😎 «Biases are like savage animals , they must be tamed and controlled, but not erased or negated» -- Anonymus acoustician 😎 |
I made nothing up nor did I attribute the last sentence to what he said. That was my takeaway re:"confines of their own listening room." A very logical take on the whole process. Love how you use quotation marks to make it look like I said it was Paul speaking when I never used them. You're getting kinda paranoid...no? As for "hearing through a room", how is that really any different than what I summed up as "people listening to the room and not the speakers." You're down to splitting hairs or as they say, "a distinction without a difference." And Paul did say that the subjects had to wait about half an hour before going in and thereafter, it took a few minutes to adjust, now that they understood the room, their hearing processes having adjusted. A point of that podcast that seems to elude you is that the speakers were tested as they were being made so the final product is fine as is. To go to the bother of testing the speaker for your sake and pick it apart is just overkill. That goes for all other gear as well unless the maker is unscrupulous and cuts corners , which you give the impression of thinking practically everyone does so you have this ready made audience of insecure hobbyists eagerly awaiting your next pronouncement. Nice gig if you can get it. All the best, |
At last Amir replied to @painter24. Anybody see a straightforward apology. Told you so. |
For someone trying to defend their honor, Amir sure is digging this hole deeper. Clearly he wont address the Erin stuff or the old posts Soundfield brought up. If you want to be accurate and thorough, address everything. Literally your reputation is built on objectivity. Address it. There are scientists who believe in god and preachers who believe in science. Open your mind to the possibilities. It's not either or. |
"When someone critiques an audio product based on measurements - and then never listens to the product, it greatly minimizes credibility and the overall review. " I assume you are talking about someone else as I do more listening tests than many reviewers combined. Again, every speaker, headphone and headphone amp gets listened to. And some others including audio tweaks. I don't do them in all areas because subjective tests there have the potential to create massively incorrect conclusions. Credibility takes a big dump when you just do listening tests that are uncontrolled and subject to huge error. In that sense you have it backward because I follow proper protocols in science of audio. Mind you, you are welcome to perform a controlled test and prove me wrong when I don't do them. Alas, no such test has come about despite me performing hundreds of tests. Any more talking points you want me to address? |
Yes. Do you ever seat down and just enjoy your music like a normal human being?
|
Wow, take a few days away and away IT grows... ASR said this: "As to GR research, you have that backward. You are believe the word of someone trying to sell you something (Danny) vs an independent reviewer (me). You have to have very little sensibility to put your trust in a company rep who offers zero proof of efficacy of what he sells. Wires wrapped around a rope to make it look thick? Yep, that is what he has done: https://youtu.be/_7HbjdQRaAM " Nope, that is not "what he has done." The cable configuration is what it is for electrical parameter control. The configuration is employed to determine the ratio of LCR reactance in order to shape a significant portion of the filter characteristics of that cable. It has an organic core instead of any polymer to decrease DA and lower DF.
|
"For someone trying to defend their honor, Amir sure is digging this hole deeper. Clearly he wont address the Erin stuff or the old posts Soundfield brought up. " There a bunch of you making all kinds of faulty arguments and personal remarks. It is only one of me answering you between everything else. Here is briefly the answer to those: Erin: He brings great value to audiophiles with respect to speaker measurements. All of you who watch his videos better go and support him with a donation or buy products with his sponsored links. What you can't do is ask me to use the membership and traffic on ASR to help him in gather said cash. I don't monetize ASR Forum in any form or fashion so sure as heck not going to let someone else do that. The last video that was posed was a clear clickbait. The title and thumbnail screamed that. I made a comment about it and folks started to scream back and forth that he should be entitled to that. To which I said he can do it in his platform (youtube), not on ASR. Complaints kept coming so I closed the thread. AJ (Soundfield) If I were you, I would dig into who AJ is before siding with him. He is used to be the most miserable objectivist on AVSForum.com. He would roast two high-end subjectivists in the morning for breakfast just as a warm up exercise. His bullying tactics were so bad that I actually chose to defend high-end audiophiles. Fortunately his knowledge of audio science and engineering was nill so was easy to push back on his claim after which, he would get personal over and over again. Let me give you a tasted of that: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/best-amp-for-1000.1309064/page-2#post-19897161 "Here is the reason why there will be such a dichotomy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect One thing AJ never had was common sense and here is an example of it bringing out that I used to defend some of you while he attacked you mercilessly. Of course a few years later he decided to build speakers in the garage and quickly realized that saying stuff like above, and acting it, would not be good for business. Enter those faulty audiophile amplifiers and speaker cables in his exhibits at audio shows. Amazing how money causes people to completely change their color. Sadly, the same happened with Erin. He used to a wonderful and core member of ASR Forum. Then he bought the expensive Klippel measurement system and in the interest of paying it off, tilted hard toward monetizing the content -- again on the backs of ASR. We repeatedly told him to not do that only to have severely negative reaction from him. Have seen this happen with another member going through the same phase change and ultimately banned from ASR. Money's power over some people is incredible. |
"Nope, that is not "what he has done." The cable configuration is what it is for electrical parameter control. The configuration is employed to determine the ratio of LCR reactance in order to shape a significant portion of the filter characteristics of that cable. It has an organic core instead of any polymer to decrease DA and lower DF." And what are those measurements? Don't exist, right? But let's say they exist: who the heck says these things are important characteristics in a power cable? That cable provides zero filtering as I explained in the video. If you are going to dispute that where are those measurements? We can measure filtering, right? Or are you talking about filtering imaginary things? Also, if a power cable filters, by definition that is bad for impulses. A lot of these companies advertise how these cables can handle power spikes better. Well, if you filter then you filter that demand for power and produce less power! You see how you are confusing the role of a power cable with that of an interconnect? Regardless, I performed a null test with music. That showed there is not a hair difference when using this power cable vs the cheapest thinnest power cable I had on hand: |
Adding on, your audio gear performs filtering. If you need a power cable to do that for you, you have bought one hell of a bad design. Fortunately even the most incompetent designer out there will build a power supply with filtering (otherwise it would hum badly). So no, you don't need a filtering AC cable even if such an animal existed. |
"Do you ever seat down and just enjoy your music like a normal human being?" What? Of course I do. I am at desk testing gear for good number of hours every day. All of that is spent listening to music. This is good number of hours per day. I recently came back from Pacific Audio Fest 2023 and not only did a bunch of listening there, I was the only reviewer posting what music was played there. See my trip reports: It is so preposterous and arrogant to keep claiming that only subjectivists listen to music. You just want to hate on people for the sake of hating. And folks say I am not nice enough to you??? |
@ASR "Nope, that is not "what he has done." The cable configuration is what it is for electrical parameter control. The configuration is employed to determine the ratio of LCR reactance in order to shape a significant portion of the filter characteristics of that cable. It has an organic core instead of any polymer to decrease DA and lower DF." And what are those measurements? Don't exist, right? But let's say they exist: who the heck says these things are important characteristics in a power cable?" DARPA |
"I have not once heard you say in your responses here, how you could do things better or where you fell short. That is why you are vilified here and Erin is beloved. you have no modesty and you can't even witness it. " Erin is not vilified because he doesn't go after your sacred cows. You know, all the stuff that makes no difference to sound but you all swear by it. Go ahead and ask Erin if he uses your fancy audio and power cables in his testing. Or uses boutique amplifiers, DACs, etc. You won't like the answer, I assure you. Erin also learned his lesson early on when he got to speaker testing. That you best not deliver negative outcomes straight out or it would not be good for growth of a youtube channel. See comments he received after his transparent review of a Klipsch speaker: https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/klipsch-heresy-iv-objective-speaker-review.1028801/page-4 "To male Karens in this thread ... Not the "beloved" Erin you know, right? Fortunately for him, he learned early on that saying stuff like this is not going to get you subscribers so best to tone it down. Me? I have not promised anyone niceness. What I have promised is data, objectivity, science and professionalism. Sometimes an answer is something you are not going to like. Not being motivated by money, I am not afraid to tell it like it is. Or have some of you get upset as you are. It can't be helped. As long as you put your emotions ahead of learning, that is going to be a problem for you. |
