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.
pennfootball7185 posts Amir is a troll Well that was easy to type but completely wrong and trollish in itself. Trolls don’t patiently answer multiple posts with substantive reasonable content and they don’t do a fraction as much for audio science as Amir does.
|
agree very much with your point of view why is this even a topic we care about? ... it’s just tribalism in the hifi context... and the tribe leader doesn’t tolerate 'backtalk' (otherwise known as intellectual challenges) in his own house so he and a few chosen minions (or alternate handles) come here to ’defend’ their honor at a human level, i view it as pathetic, and ultimately trivial |
Quarelling will not solve this...Nor insults... Objectivist as subjectivist tribes focus on gear, one tribe use electrical tools mainly the other his ears... But it is NOT THE GEAR electrical properties measured or not , verified or not, which is the key in audio; Psycho-acoustic basic knowledge in a room is the crux and key of audio improvement... Nothing else... But for sure my sympathy goes to those who learn how to listen with their EARS... so useful measures of gear can be useful information, they dont say as much as Amir claim they said about all the aspects of sound qualities for a human ears... Psycho-acoustic hearing facts will solve this debate... Read my article...I posted it 4 times waiting an answer...To no avail... Amir did not answered it nor prof... Are they not scientists? We will see...
😊😊 |
That’s part of what’s so odd about this thread. It’s using A’gon to debate ASR in a way that wouldn’t be tolerated on ASR’s own site. That alone tells me all I need to know about ASR. |
Effort and Value are two different things. The comments about needing to be "paid" in order to take notes at an audio show was telling. No need for notes, just listen, and report out what you hear. Audio science not required, just listen and share. Most here who’ve been to a show always remember the systems that sound best to them. Does not require a notepad. Again, the majority here at Audiogon do not need a meter or graph to know what sounds good. Listen, then measure. Completely different philosophies that may never agree. A for effort, maybe. Then again, what’s the goal. Different goals it seems. Leave it to agree to disagree since the goals are vastly different. Enjoy the music.
|
My claim studying this article above is not FIRST AND LAST to justify subjectivist trusting only their "taste" hearing for gear, NOT AT ALL, it is about deconstructing the DOGMATIC techno babble inference used by Amir to predict on the electrical measures in the linear and symmetrical time domain modeling what humans will hear from their non linear and non symmetrical time domain historical standpoint of observation and to infirm the Amir conclusion about what they cannot hear on the basis of these electrical tools used for verifying gear specs... Amir and prof where is your answer ? Do you have a better hearing theory unknown to physicists Oppenheim and Magnasco ? Do you think they will take hearing claims of ASR seriously ? 😊 Who read this article ? It is not a review in stereophile, or technological babble about hearing, it is a pure scientific article in the frontiers between physics and psycho-acoustic ?
As i said multiples times, i am not subjectivist nor an objectivist because i focus on acoustic and psycho-acoustic not on gear pieces...I tuned my room WITHOUT need for a blind test... Acoustician used measuring tools for rapid efficient practicalities but their ears works also to the beginning till the end... There is a reason why...
|
I couldn't agree with you more. This is tribalism. The evangelists at ASR can be quite nasty. I had to bow out from discussions there entirely. I'm not commenting on Amir as a person or what he is trying to do. I don't really know if I have the full picture or get the point of such efforts. I do, however, think that the ASR website is not a friendly place where one can learn much about this hobby.
|
Amir has to stop with the medical analogies for their obvious flaws. Having cancer and not heeding your doctors advice will result in your dying of cancer. Enjoying the sound of a component and not following his advice that it measures poorly and therefore, should sound bad, will result in your still enjoying the component, unless you're very insecure. I think 10 out of 10 doctors would agree with that assessment and are thankful that Amir didn't choose a career in medicine. All the best, |
The short answer is no. I'm fine with measurements but the conclusions he draws from them are of dubious worth, I find him smug, which is a trait I really don't stand for in anybody. There is occasional interesting discourse on the site but for every interesting thread there are three in which some evangelical devotee posts third-party measurements and the usual suspects have a field day bashing the product that they never have heard and (let's be honest) in many cases can't afford. |
I think the Erin fellow is just another YouTube person and I don’t put anymore stock in his opinion than the next guy. However, I’ve seen Amir make some claims about Erin’s and others that I find out of line. I’ve seen Amir do many things he accuses Erin (and others) of. We can use simple objective facts to prove this.
Amir says Erin’s video was removed because it was clickbait and he doesn’t want anyone to earn money by having their videos shared on ASR. As someone who has perused ASR a number of times this doesn’t make sense. Why? Well, there are countless threads that are shared on ASR by members - seemingly with the intention of making fun of them - where Amir engages. From GR Research to Goldensound to John Darko. Here are two recent examples:
Both of those threads are still open - after weeks - and have generated no telling how many views by the ASR membership. If Amir is truly worried about someone making money by getting views through ASR then why doesn’t Amir delete/close those threads? The answer is plainly simple but let me give some background first.
The fact is someone shared Erin’s video because they thought it was interesting and asked others to comment. Amir called it clickbait and put Erin down.* Many members disagreed with Amir. Amir got upset at that and then closed the thread after putting his last word in. In other words: anyone can share any links to anyone’s YouTube videos or website as long as it is done with the purpose of making fun of that person. In the case of Erin’s video that wasn’t what happened and Amir didn’t like that. So he closed the thread. After he intentionally derailed it with his off-topic remarks.
This makes it pretty clear to see that Amir just doesn’t like Erin and used "clickbait" as an excuse to lock the thread. If he meant what he said he’d lock and/or delete every other single thread with external links or things he thinks are harmful to the community. For someone reason, rather than helping to encourage others to look at objective data through other sources, Amir has chosen to create false narratives around those outlets so that his viewership will take his side. When it backfires, that is when Amir gets upset.
As for clickbait, let’s all remember how many back-and-forth videos Amir has created about Danny @ GR Research and Paul McGowan @ PS Audio. Amir knew those would get views. He says "my audience asked me to make this video". This is proof he knew he would get views by creating additional drama and tension in the audio community while also being an excuse for creating said content. A single video on the topic would have been adequate but he continued to play in the mud because he knew it would get him views. One of his written reviews of GR Research speakers even had the words "a joke" in the title.** Talk about clickbait.
Let’s not also forget that Amir was recently belittled by Steve Guttenberg - while Steve was speaking at AXPONA 2023 - for not having as many subscribers as Steve does. This was brought up in a thread on ASR. Steve was asked his view on measurements. Steve made a snide remark about Amir not having as many followers (without saying Amir’s name, which is childish on its own). So, what does Amir do in response? He asks his viewers to subscribe and like to get his numbers up so he can have better "influence in the YouTube world".*** Despite him having said previously and even in this thread that he doesn’t do this sort of thing.
It is plain to see that Amir doesn’t like Erin and uses any reason he can to justify his logic even when it clearly goes against his other actions such as failure to delete/close other threads which contain links through ASR and his own part in playing "the game" by creating content he knows will create drama and fuel views, asking for donations, asking for likes/subscribers all while running a business that sells various brands. No matter how big a disclaimer he puts on it he’s still generating interest and driving potential sales through his channel to his own business. A single speaker sold through Madrona Digital is far more than most of these YouTube guys make in a week. Some even a month.
I have no issue with anyone monetizing their efforts as long as there is transparency. Unfortunately, Amir criticizes others for doing all the things he says he doesn’t do. These are facts and easy to verify with simple searches online. I’ve provided some below. But Amir and (some of) his dedicated followers conveniently ignore all these objective facts and cast doubt on others so they can prop Amir up as the only person capable of providing honest and accurate reviews. Amir cannot say all these things about others and expect us to ignore the fact he does the exact same things.
- J
|
"Effort and Value are two different things. The comments about needing to be "paid" in order to take notes at an audio show was telling. No need for notes, just listen, and report out what you hear. " That is precisely what I did in my show report. I even put the music that I heard in the report. Here is the link again: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/amirs-2023-pacific-audio-fest-report-day-2.45942/ "Another classic in the form of Patricia Barber's Ode to Billie Joe Neat channel separation. Good bass for such little speakers (I didn't know there was a woofer in the back at this point)" [another suite] Another Night · Cody High Superb detail and dynamics. Excellent recording as I listen to it from youtube.
So I did and reported what I heard. If you had bothered to spend 30 seconds looking at my show report, you would have know that. The poster apparently wanted me to write a full book report for every suite and hence my answer that I am not a journalist that gets paid by the word to do that. Maybe next time I use ChatGPT to make up subjective remarks as to make some of you happy. Surely that would do a better job than word salads we get from such "reviewers."
|
"Amir says Erin's video was removed because it was clickbait and he doesn't want anyone to earn money by having their videos shared on ASR. " His video was NOT removed. For heaven's sake, why don't you guys spend 10 seconds fact checking stuff you write??? Here is the thread again for all to see: All I said in there was this as a follow up from another poster wondering if he has "marketing intentions:" "Hate clickbait titles like that. It seems every second there is another like that. This whole monetization business drives creators to make so many of these." That comment got a lot of people to throw themselves over the railroad tracks defending Erin and getting quite personal to boot. So I eventually closed the thread since there was no substance that was being discussed from his video anyway. "As for clickbait, let's all remember how many back-and-forth videos Amir has created about Danny @ GR Research and Paul McGowan @ PS Audio. Amir knew those would get views." And what would views do for me on a channel that has no monetization, ads or sponsorship? Nothing. I do those videos because members and non-members ask for an answer to claims made by Danny, Paul, etc. In every case I work hard to make sure there are substantive technical information. They are not, "here are my top 5 speakers." No definition of clickbait applies to my video whereas it is clear as a day that it applies to Erin's. Erin does want the views, the ads, the sponsorships, the channel growth, etc. Again, those are fine for him. Just don't use ASR to promote content like this. I don't know why this is such a hard concept for you all to grasp. |
"It is plain to see that Amir doesn’t like Erin and uses any reason he can to justify his logic even when it clearly goes against his other actions such as failure to delete/close other threads which contain links through ASR and his own part in playing "the game" by creating content he knows will create drama and fuel views, asking for donations, asking for likes/subscribers all while running a business that sells various brands." Nonsense. I post a review almost every other day. Few are controversial things or created to create drama. Latest reviews were a DCA headphone and TP RA3 rackmount amplifier. The latter is an incredibly nice, state of the art amplifier with beautiful display and input selection going for just $229. Hardly anything I test has anything to do with my company whose business is custom integration for high-end residential and commercial projects. If there is such a conflict, it is noted at the start of the review, you know, the transparency you talked about: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/jbl-ac25-speaker-review.43520/ "NOTE: our company, Madrona Digital is a dealer for Harman products (and hence JBL) for custom integration business. So while there is no benefit to us one way or the other how this review goes, feel free to read whatever bias you want into my subjective remarks." This is how the review ended: "I can't provide a recommendation one way or the other without evaluating the AC25 with its companion filtering. Wish the company would make this more clear in its marketing material." You are also out of line with that "asking likes." I never, ever do that in my videos. There is not one mention of such thing in the video or even in the notes below it. The videos are presented as pure information for people to watch and enjoy, free of ads, or any kind of interruptions. It seems you are so used to people trying to milk others for such things that you assumed I do the same when the facts are completely against your claims. |
"Some people hear. Some people listen. Some people measure. Some people know the difference." We measure and listen. Seems to be a better strategy than just listen. But sure, some still think they rather know less about their purchases than more.... And think they have such super human hearing ability that have no need for any instrumentation. I get it. |
@amir_asr I dont think he was asking for a book. It would be great to hear about these speakers but you provided no detail other than things like "nice recording" that gives zero insight into what you liked or didnt like. @amir_asr Yeah you didn’t remove the video but you shut down the discussion about the video, effectively removing it from being bumped to the top. Tomato tomatoe. Censorship at its worst. How much money have you made from ASR referring clients to your business? Or from people reading your content. Traffic is traffic. You are shooting yourself in the foot. I have not posted on ASR which I was actively participating in and getting engaging conversation going, since you took that thread down. His title is not clickbait. This is clickbait. Saying something you clearly do not mean or is meant to just get people to watch and then stating the opposite or changing the videos’s intent. "I don’t know why the is such hard concept for you to grasp." |
"Quote: If you have not already, please go to my youtube page and subscribe. It won’t make me any money but will work to improve our influence in youtube world:" Oh, that is what you meant. Clever of you to put that in the footnote. That comment came about because of people saying if someone has more subscribers, he must be more right. So I thought I put in a request or two in the text on ASR for the last couple of videos. But as I stated, no video has any such requests unlike what you claimed and implied in your post. So you can't possibly compare me to other youtubers who stop the flow of the video, only to beg for subscribers, likes, notifications, etc. |
@amir_asr You do ask for donations! Your blindspots are immense. |
"But Amir and (some of) his dedicated followers conveniently ignore all these objective facts and cast doubt on others so they can prop Amir up as the only person capable of providing honest and accurate reviews." No one ignores such a thing. Indeed, the opposite is true in the number of people on ASR who defend Erin, including the very thread you were talking about (his top 5 video). Neither me, or them think Erin's videos are dishonest in any way. The difference simply comes from a concept that you don't want to accept: ASR is not meant to be used to help someone else monetize their content. No forum allows this. You will get banned immediately on any other forum if you post a video and immediately asked for donations. Yet, I allow Erin's videos to be posted. Other fora would just ban any such links and go about their business. Bottom line, I love what Erin is doing as far as generating great objective data for speakers. I didn't love it when he attempted to use ASR to grow his activities and pay off the cost of his gear. I can't let him do this without the floodgates opening to everyone else wanting to do it. I think the concept of a pure, non-commercial site like ASR is so foreign to people that they just assume there must be more going on. Well, there isn't. We have created a unique social experiment where members and some companies send gear to me, and I test and report on it. I am fortunate enough to have had a long (and hard) career in tech as not need to make a living from it. This gives me incredible freedom to do things that others can't. I for example vote that 2/3 of the gear I test. Only 1/3 gets my recommendation. No one can survive such stats, including Erin by the way. But I am not here to make friends. I am here to provide transparency with respect to performance of audio gear. You know, the thing you said you wanted but are working hard to cast aside. Good news is that countless fellow audiophiles of yours are seeing the value and helping us grow by reading the content, spreading the good word and sending in more gear to be tested. That upsets a few of you here. Why? Because your casual evaluation of audio is being proven wrong in objective testing. So what to do? You can start learning what audio is really about. Or complain I guess....
|
@amir_asr Why then did you allow Erin’s video only to close the thread? People aren’t allowed to dissent? I was considering sending you some gear to review that would have filled a nice gap in your informational catalog. Not anymore after I’ve seen how you conduct yourself here. Clearly you are not here to make friends. 😂 |
"@amir_asr You do ask for donations! Your blindspots are immense." So is yours in not seeing the difference between me and others. The donations are completely optional. No one gets exclusive access for donating as every other youtuber is doing by putting content behind patreon, etc. I detest that and am never going to force people to pay to get information. The ask for the donation is also a one-linear at end of text reviews. Nothing of the sort exists in any of the videos. Donations help me feel better when I am sitting there packing boxes, taping and labeling and schlepping them to FedEx. They also pay to buy gear that I have no personal interest in testing. Unlike others, that is where it ends. No one is subjected to ton of ads as they read ASR or watch my videos. No monetized links as to cloud the real intent behind giving positive reviews. No company sponsorships as to make me beholding to them. And it is not like if I didn't ask for the donations you all become fans. That is just another made up thing to complain about. |
"@amir_asr Why then did you allow Erin’s video only to close the thread? People aren’t allowed to dissent? I was considering sending you some gear to review that would have filled a nice gap in your informational catalog. Not anymore after I’ve seen how you conduct yourself here. Clearly you are not here to make friends. 😂" I have no catalog to fill. What do you think I run, a department store? Currently there are probably 30 to 60 items here for review and the backlog has stayed like that forever. You should send me gear because *you* want to know how it performs and you think it would benefit your fellow audiophiles. To the extent you have no desire to do either, you are no friend of mine either. |
"Good news is that countless fellow audiophiles of yours are seeing the value and helping us grow by reading the content, spreading the good word and sending in more gear to be tested. That upsets a few of you here. Why? Because your casual evaluation of audio is being proven wrong in objective testing. So what to do? You can start learning what audio is really about. Or complain I guess...." The lack of self-awareness, condescension and unbridled arrogance in that paragraph reminds me of every would be despot in history: inflated self worth and importance with no latitude for dissent... or facts. Keep trying to prove a negative. I'm out... |
"@amir_asr I dont think he was asking for a book. It would be great to hear about these speakers but you provided no detail other than things like "nice recording" that gives zero insight into what you liked or didnt like." A lot of things would be "nice to have." I am not your man to give you all this. I have my own life to live and am not going to invest 10X more energy in providing a show report that some of you are demanding, while at the same time throwing every rock you have at me. People who read my show notes enjoyed seeing the pictures, the commentary and importantly, discover of new music. Some members were kind enough to make Tidal, Spotify, etc. playlists out of them. You want more? Go do your own show report. This self entitlement is really getting out of hand..... |
@amir_asr You didn't bother to answer the question I had bolded underlined and in italics. WHY DID YOU CLOSE THE THREAD?! People do not have to view Erin's video, they can comment on the discussion if they want. You are a hypocrite. The fact that you haven't fessed up to one iota of responsibility on your end in this discussion leads me to believe you are in fact narcissistic and have no interest in adopting other view points. |
@amir_asr I wasn’t complaining about the lack of work on the show report, or saying you didn’t put in effort. I was showing you what the other person commented on which you denied. There are sections and booths where you just didn’t add any information on the product. What am I being entitled to? I don't even want more information on the show. I was just citing an example of what you denied. You sense entitlement because people are holding you accountable and you refuse to answer and address basic stuff. This is not going well for you or ASR. @piaudiol Totally |
@amir_asr ever consider changing ASR to Amirs Measurements Science Review, since zero listening tests are/will ever be done? I seem to recall some very funny excuses as to why no AVA ABX box. What are your thoughts of being subjected to an actual valid listening test at PAF 2024, with no peeking at your measurement devices for the first time ever and putting it on Youtube? |
@soundfield like I said I would pay to see this, and he won't answer you because he has selective hearing. |
I will not post for a fifth times the article proving that we cannot deduce from gear measurement tools what human hearing is about and able to do... We can debunk cables or gear alleged specs yes with the tools Amir use or help a room acoustic embeddings nothing else, especially not predicting the perceived quality of an audio system with electrical measurements of gear specs... It takes few minutes to understand this article neither Amir nor prof make a comment.... They answered to insults but not to science it seems ... 😊 I am the only one i think in this debate to argue with a HARD psycho-acoustic science argument , no technological babble about hearing and measures and blind testing "golden ears" and debunking them etc ... The problem is that Amir cannot at all prove any relation AT THE END between gear measures and listening experience... He will never be able to prove it because it is impossible to do it with his tools... The ears dont work as our tools works...Period... If it was not the case the article of these two physicists will be proven wrong...
here simple remarks about Fourier method conditions of application by a Physicist, Hans Van Maanen: «Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. » https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
Now imagine Amir with his linear modelling gear measuring tools saying to us WHAT WE MUST HEAR... Amir thanks for debunking gear, but stay there; dont try to judge people from your DOGMA and tool prejudice and stop debunking people hearings experience, history or even alleged "golden ears" ... You cannot do it with your tools if someone read any science ... |
| Post removed |
«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊 By the way he say the same thing that Oppenheim and Magnasco : «Although it is outside the scope of this paper, it should be noted that human hearing is likely to be neither linear nor time-invariant,...» https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
His bio resume : Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen was born in Arnhem, Netherlands where he attended primary and high school. After finishing his high school education, he started working at the Shell laboratories in Amsterdam. As it was clear to him that he would need more education, he studied at the University of Amsterdam in the evening hours, from which he received his B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Physics with Mathematics, Information Science and Chemistry, both with honours. At the Shell laboratories, he worked on flow measurement techniques, fluid mechanics, chemical engineering and turbulence, resulting in several publications. Then he worked on the application of small computers in experiments and the related data-processing. He applied his experiences to the dataprocessing of Laser-Doppler Anemometry data, which he laid down in his Ph.D.-thesis for the Delft University of Technology. In 1997, he moved to the Shell laboratory in Rijswijk (Netherlands) and worked on multi-phase flow rate measurement in the upstream sector of the oil and gas industry. He was heavily involved in wet-gas measurement, for which he extended the work of Rick de Leeuw and others for horizontal Venturis. This resulted in a mathematical model for the multi-phase wet-gas flow in Venturis. After leaving Shell in 2010, he became an independent consultant for Hint Europe and in that position he extended his modelling to vertical upward Venturis. He presented his work on many different conferences and published numerous papers. His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems and riding a motorcycle in a touristic way.
|
The conclusion of another interesting article by a physicist:
The result presented here has relevance for the perfor- ......................................................
Temporal Resolution of Hearing Probed by
|
Amir doesn't monetize or accept payments. Just donations. So you'd have to "donate". Interested in those ML amps at Madrona that have better bass than any AB amps, according to Supreme Leader? Donate at the cash register. |
Now the nail in the coffin of Amir debunking audiophiles hearings by DOGMA with his electrical linear modelling tools used to verify the gear specs: This dude is a physicist i will not reproduce all 33 pages of his article of 2023 , Amir can read it himself...He wrote also about human hearings beating the Fourier uncertainty limits... There is a section dedicated to audio application which is very interesting... Only a short extract where this physicist seems to think the opposite of Amir about the "super" hearing abilities of human : «Claims that differences in upstream components http://file:///C:/Users/Utilisateur/Downloads/SSRN-id4437822.pdf |
"So you deny that knowing the measurements before listening may cause bias?" You are asking a loaded question as to say, "if measurements can bias listening tests, let me use my eyes just as well to do my listening tests." Answer to that is that if you know such biases exists, then you better not do any sighted listening tests. On my end, when such knowledge can create corrupt outcomes, then I don't even do the listening test. Example is DACs. Unless distortion is very high, I don't do sighted listening tests. In other cases, measurements provide incredible value in creating the proper listening test. If for example I know from measurements that a headphone amplifier has trouble driving low impedance headphones, I use that information to drive a such a headphone with content specifically designed to push that corner of fidelity. For speakers/headphones, it goes without saying that we can tell the difference between them so blinding is not needed on that front. What I do in my listening tests there is to use the measurement as a guide to see if I can improve the response using EQ. If I can, then I publish that EQ for others to try as well. Knowing measurements there is therefore a wonderful tool just as it is for your doctor. People who claim they should listen first and measure second, just have it wrong. They will then be giving you a random subjective opinion in a sighted test with no reliability factor. Who is to say their ears tell the truth? Or that the speakers are setup in the way that the room is not dominating the response? Or the content? I have done a video on this very topic: "Reviewing Speakers - Measurements and Listening Tests" In there I show published studies involving professional audio reviewers and how unreliably and poorly done their assessments are. If they can't produce reliable evidence for speakers, what hope is there for amps, DACs, etc.? Answer is none. So once again, measurements are your friend, not your enemy. Don't try to convince yourself otherwise with an argument like that. |
You dont get it Amir... No one with a brain had problem with your measurements information... Everybody with a brain has problem with your dogmatic stance about human hearing abilities limitations in relation to audio experience and your claim that only electrical measurement tell the story to be told about listenings acoustic qualities of gear ... have you read what i posted ?
|
"«Claims that differences in upstream components Kunchur has no idea what he is talking about when it comes to matters related to audio. His expertise is in physics and has nothing to do with this domain. I have done a full video on his last paper with totally incorrect test protocols: Scientific Proof of Measurable Difference in Audio Cables? Paper Review In every field, you can find people who write official looking stuff that will impress the layman. Don't fall for it. Learn the topic yourself and then you see that such "experts" are not that at all. |
I speak about human hearings and abilities, i cited his article and you answer that his protocols in cable listening is not good...😊He is a physicist then i aqm not surprized that his protocols for cables measuring and hearings may be criticized... This dont invalidate all of what he say about the capacities of human hearings... What about what he say about hearings ? What about Oppenheim aqnd Magnasco article about human hearings in the time domain ? I DONT SPEAK ABOUT CABLES PROTOCOLS... I speak about citing these articles of 4 different physicists, about the impossibility with simple electrical me3asures of gear components TO PREDICT QUALITATIVE HEARING IMPRESSION IN THE TIME DOMAIN .... The ears is non linear... it is impossible as you claim to correlate human perception of qualities in a linear correlation with your measures of gear... thats is the point... You can debunk gear specs by falsifying them , but pretending to inmpose your TOOLS over human listening experience is DOGMATIC cultist ideology not science...
And what about the human ability to beat the Fourier uncertainty in the time domain ?
|
"@amir_asr ever consider changing ASR to Amirs Measurements Science Review, since zero listening tests are/will ever be done?" Not at all because there is a ton of discussion of audio science. Audio Science is not just about blind tests. But sure, we have a number of blind tests posted. DAC blind ABX in-home test: Hegel h390 internal DAC vs Mytek Manhatten ii DAC Blind Listening Test 2: Neumann KH 80 vs JBL 305p MkII vs Edifier R1280T vs RCF Arya Pro5 I have also been posting blind test results for literally decades. Here is a sample: foo_abx 1.3.4 report If you believe in blind tests, how come you are not arguing with folks here saying they are not useful? Not convenient for business AJ? Yet another example of someone claiming what we do ats ASR, only to trivially be shown to not have any idea whatsoever.
|
DEBUNK THIS ONE AMIR : This physicist is Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen, His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems «Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. » https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊 By the way he say the same thing that Oppenheim and Magnasco : «Although it is outside the scope of this paper, it should be noted that human hearing is likely to be neither linear nor time-invariant,...» https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
Instead of AD HOMINEM ATTACK about the physiciss i cited ( as they know nothing in high end audio) debunk this last one who say the same as the one you attack as ignorant in Audio matter.... Are you serious? ANSWER about time domain and the Fourier uncertainty and the impossibility to reduce human hearing to Fourier tools and frequencies analysis..TIME domain is fundame4ntal and the relation between hearing and natural sounds impose a time symmetry breaking and the brain non linear tools... |
I find this hostility toward Amir more than shocking. Some of the accusations here border on the libelous and certainly do not reflect reality. This is becoming akin to a forum for those seeking to prove that, despite measurements and ample evidence, the wold is indeed flat because, well, because... Objective testing to a given set of criteria does not indicate whether that piece of equipment will be "to your taste". I have the exact same issue with colleagues in the motion picture industry that judge lenses purely on the basis of measured performance using specific techniques. While this is very useful in understanding how a lens might look, the data is a guide to understanding what you might prefer. The same is true of audio. I've spent enough time in the best recording studios on the planet to know that even these carefully calibrated environments have their own sonic signatures. The speakers I use at home had a former life sitting in a mastering suite at Abbey Road and are the exact speakers so many recordings I love were mastered on. But I am foolish to think they sound exactly the same as they did in the environment they were made and calibrated for. Still, I'd be very interested in seeing what the results would be in him testing them, if they didn't weight 140lbs each, I'd ship them to him to find out. But it wouldn't really alter the fact that I like the way they sound, in the space I have them working. |
"Everybody with a brain has problem with your dogmatic stance about human hearing abilities limitations in relation to audio experience and your claim that only electrical measurement tell the story to be told about listenings acoustic qualities of gear ..." I have made no such claims. You all keep making up stuff about who we are and what we do. We absolutely value listening tests and more so than measurements. What we do NOT value is joe audiophile sighted listening tests. Science doesn't care how good you claim your hearing is. Your eyes should not be involved in said evaluation. Conditions must be made equal. And statistical rigor needs to exist in the outcome. Failing that, we can measure. Measurements tell us a lot about the design of a product and audibility of its response. Take this amplifier frequency response measurement: See the comment about load dependency? The amplifier output impedance rises with frequency. That then interacts with the impedance of the speaker causing variability in tonality of sound. Same thing happens with tube amps although their high impedance tends to be across the board. A person without measurements and understanding of the above technical topic would connect some speaker to this amp and declare it as sounding warm, bright or neutral. Any of those could be true depending on what speaker he hooked up to it (and his hearing to some extent). You would not at all know then that his evaluation may not apply to you. There is no way you can sniff and tease out the above factor by just playing music with this amp. Next measurement of power shows you this: This amplifier costs less than $100 yet it produces this incredible amount of power at 190 watts (peak) per channel!!! I bet all of you would just one look at this little box and think it would produce a couple of watts: From noise and distortion testing we know that it is keeping those factors below more than half of the 240 amplifiers I have tested as well. Information does not need to be complete to be highly useful! But it does need to be reliable. So no measurements don't tell the "whole story" but they sure as heck tell you a lot more than some random, totally unreliable listening test by random audiophile or youtube reviewer.
|
| Post removed |
I myself thank you for the information provided by your measures ABOUT THE GEAR...I did not thank you for your assault on human listening experience with mere few electrical tools used to measure GEAR ... I dont insulted you and i dont played with you..... dont play with me and ANSWER ME ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THESE ARTICLES ... But you never answered what i spoke about with 4 articles... All saying that human hearing abilities and perceptive experience cannot be predicted by the kind of measurements you provide... Debunking gear and fetichism of audiophiles DONT MEANS THAT ALL THEIR LISTENING EXPERIENCE IS ILLUSORY... The heart of audio is psycho-acoustic... Not gear mesures so useful they are... ANSWER this physicist who design high end audio as a hobby without ad hominem attack this time... DEBUNK THIS ONE AMIR : This physicist is Dr. Hans R.E. van Maanen, His hobbies are listening to music (mostly classical), developing high-end audio systems «Although the Fourier theory has been well established since the second half of the 19th century,it is surprising that so little attention is given nowadays to the conditions, required to apply the linear theory. It has been applied unreluctantly to electronics and human hearing, even though neither fulfill either of these requirements. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the results are inconsistent with listening experiences. » https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊 By the way he say the same thing that Oppenheim and Magnasco : «Although it is outside the scope of this paper, it should be noted that human hearing is likely to be neither linear nor time-invariant,...» https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf
|
"@amir_asr still waiting to hear about this $100.00 BAC that smokes all other DACs in the $5K range. You are quite the shill. Or is it s schill? " What the heck is a "BAC?" If you mean DAC, easy to show. First up is your expensive DAC: Review and Measurements of PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC ($5999): Here is its noise+distortion: As you see, it ranks way at the bottom in yellow color. Here is its noise performance alone: Can't even clear the noise floor of 16 bit CD 40 years after introduction of said format!!! Multitone test shows heavy rise of distortion in low frequencies: Reason for that? Output transformer. Designer admitted that they cut costs and picked a cheaper transformer resulting in this much increased distortion. Yes, you pay $6000 for DAC and yet corners had to be cut. Here are my listening test results (sighted): "I started the testing with my audiophile, audio-show, test tracks. You know, the very well recorded track with lucious detail and "black backgrounds." I immediately noticed lack of detail in PerfectWave DS DAC. It was as if someone just put a barrier between you and the source. Mind you, it was subtle but it was there. I repeated this a few times and while it was not always there with all music, I could spot it on some tracks. For $100 DAC, I would do you one better with a $99 DAC from Schiit: Schiit Modi 3+ Review (Stereo DAC) Here is how it did in noise+distortion: It nicely lands in the excellent category of blue. For noise, it nicely clears 18 bits: Does the same in multitone: No spitting of distortion in low frequencies as the PS Audio DAC did. See? Not hard at all. Give me a bit more budget and I can get you balanced output, nice display, etc. But if sound you want, the Schiit at $99 is much more performant than the $6000 PS Audio DAC. |
WHY DONT YOU ANSWER ON THE MATTER ABOUT HEARING ?
I dont neeed gear measurements here... I never doubt that they are USEFUL to know... What i dont accept is you pretense and claims to debunk hearing experience with these simplistic tools... Ears brain work in non symmetrcal time domain in a non linear fashion and cannot be explain by Fourier Methods algorythms... Then YOU CANNOT LAUGH AND PUT ALL AUDIOPHILES LISTENING IN THE SAME TRASH BIN... do you understand? You can give your gear measures information yes we thank you for that ; but you cannot mock human hearing experience with your claims about gear and your tools to measure it... REAL PSYCHO-ACOUSTIC SCIENCE debunk your claim here... |
"ANSWER this physicist who design high end audio as a hobby without ad hominem attack this time..." Did you not watch the video I provided where I go through every one of his tests and demonstrate why they are all completely wrong? Here it is again: Scientific Proof of Measurable Difference in Audio Cables? Paper Review I go on for 41 minutes breaking down every claim and test in his paper. Please don't keep demanding that I answer you when I have already done so. |
| Post removed |
