Good read: why comparing specifications is pointless

@coralkong , “This will be my last post to you.

You are acting like a petulant child. Go away, I'm not buying your BS, and no how many times you feel the need to get the last word, I don’t agree with you.”

+1 me as well.

Amir,

I am sure you are well intended. But you provide evidence that you do not understand what quality audio is all about in your posts.

You listen to half of the units? and process 300 units per year? I would not begin to consider evaluating a single new component without listening to it for a couple months. This would be only after being completely familiar with my system without change for months… many months. This establishes a base line of a sound you understand at all levels. This is a reference system. A professional reviewer will spend months evaluating a single component.

Have you read professional reviews? Reviewers have systems they understand inside and out. Then they spend, what a hundred… sometimes several hundred hours listening. The complexity of sound reproduction is layer upon layer of nuance. Which is why a whole glossary of terminology to describe the nuances of sound reproduction exists. Rhythm and pace, micro-details…etc.

It now makes sense how your charts match your perceived quality. The sonic evaluation is so cursory that all you pick up is the very gross highest level characteristics of the sound. This is not at all what high performance audio is about. It is about communicating the full breath and depth of the musical experience… not the wire-frame representation.

When I attend a live symphony it can be so emotionally moving that it brings tears to my eyes. I am left breathless in the beauty created by the music. My audio system can do that. This is what the pursuit is about. Doing this requires incredible dedication in people that produce components to achieve this, and in evaluation of sound far in excess of a few variable, and in choosing and assembling a system. Great components come from designers that work by listening to their products long after they have run out of variables to measure.

I went to the ASR site about six months or so ago. I read many review (most of the content) and conclusions. I particularly focused on components I had personal experience with. From a detailed analysis of method, reviews and conclusions I realized it was perhaps well intended but naive, misguided and misleading. To the beginner, it embodies the essence of what it takes to send them in the wrong direction if they wish to get good sound quality for a budget.

@cleeds 

That must be it. To me, it just looks like fun with charts. I used to use charts to understand the performance of an organization. I’d find correlations then dig down to the cause and find it had nothing to do with the organization, but some the accounting system’s allocation mechanism. I found all sorts of correlations that turned out meaningless. In chemical and radioactive abundances in a previous career where they were interesting but useless as a predictor. 
 

My systems are shown under my UserID

@amir_asr

I have no idea what you gain from your deceptive site and posts. I like charts, I was a practicing scientist for over a decade. I have been a professional engineer and led large global technical groups and teams that evaluate and implement real world systems that run large corporations, high tech companies that produce some of the most advanced technology on the planet. But simplistic charting like you do completely miss the point of high end audio. You are not capturing the essence of the real problem but side tracking those that actually want to learn about this complex and interesting pursuit. You are adding no value for folks that are attempting to build great sounding systems.