I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.

It is a public thread discussion... And you accuse him of mob mentality...

You cannot accuse me of that mob mentality no?

I presented arguments... You dont want articulated arguments ?... You prefer mob mentality discussion with deluded audiophiles?

i apologize in this case...

In a discussion logic is a large two-way road that MANY people can take at the same time if it is not a mob mentality discussion for sure... i take the road...I apologize to you also for that anyway and to realworldaudio too ...But i am sure you like logic and he surely like logic too... We all hate mob mentality...

I am certain I asked the question of @realworldaudio . Would it not be appropriate to let him/her answer?

I thought it was well understood that measurements are a valid place to start from, but by no means the be-all-end-all.  Ears are.

People sometimes prefer the sound of things that are measurably “worse” than other things, i.e. analog vs. digital, tubes vs. solid state, etc.

I feel to keep oneself sane in pursuit of great sound, measurements provide consistent repeatable parameters, but not necessarily the final word, though perhaps sometimes they do.

Why does Amir's opinion matter so much?

Trust me when I say Amir's opinion does not matter to me at all, it carries zero weight for me. What this thread is about is trying to understand the mind set of people that only rely on measurements and not the sound of audio gear. However, thanx for posting and stimulating the conversation. I welcome all input.

The people who measure and explain are a dime a dozen. Those that see the artfulness and beauty to life are a very different crowd. It’s unlikely that either group will end up in your living room spinning records so just realize the camp you’re in and channel the information to develop your mojo. 

@realworldaudio I will interpret your response to indicate my post was correct.

@russ69  thank you. Some seem pretty worked up here.  I cannot speak for Amir and he does come across to me as unjustifiably arrogant, but I expect most who use measurements in audio use them more for relative comparisons than absolutes. It's why I tried the IEMs though I didn't know if I would be happy. I do expect there is more truth to DAC measurements than many audiophiles want to accept, but human interpretation of say a tube amp is also part of the science so to ignore that is not "audio science" either. There needs to be more acceptance and less animosity on both sides.

Just for entertainment purposes, here are two opinions of measurements with different conclusions.  

John Atkinson: Rogue Audio's Sphinx offers excellent measured performance with little sign of the usual compromises made in class-D designs. 

As a line-level integrated amplifier and headphone amplifier, the Sphinx V3 continues the high standard set by the original. 

And From Amir at ASR: Perfect marketing, poor engineering. Story of high-end audio.

Needless to say, I can NOT recommend the Rogue Audio Sphinx V3.

The best is when A.S.R. jukes the stats on a product. A.S.R. gets called out on juking the stats. A.S.R.then ignores getting called out for juking said stats. For example, instead of measuring an item with a 2 volt input signal, fairly common, they throw a 14 volt signal at it. Good stuff! The devil is in the details. Also the Chinese brands “always” seem to be the best of the best on that site.

Measurements are the first thing.

But listening for yourself is the final thing.

ASR usually listens; it provided a reason for not listening in this case.  ASR provides objective measurements of equipment  It subscribes to the theory that good equipment should measure well.  It does not claim that equipment that does not measure well will not sound good to you.  There is a lot of equipment that measures well *and* sounds good.  For example, ASR raved about the measurements of the Benchmark AHB2 power amplifier and both The Absolute Sound and Stereophile raved about how it sounded.  

Who's Amir?

He's just a guy. Maybe knowledgeable, maybe he has an agenda. He may have a YouTube channel ... I have too. Why trust the opinion of just one guy? Look broader. What do other reviews say? I bet there are more? Are they positive? If a majority is so-so then I'd have my doubts ... if almost everyone likes the product it'll be fine. Thoughts on build quality, components used, functionality, specifications, measurements ... those can be objective but if it comes down to how a products sounds it's only my own ears I'd trust.

@russ69   Yup.  I find it incredible how many people here don't listen before laying down their bread.  But these days many people order a car without driving it.  However modern cars are mostly all the same.  Unlike hi-fi components.

+ @jjss49
+ @sns
+ @ghdprentice
+ @nonoise

@russ69

If something measures so poorly, wouldn’t you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear?

Good posts. Here’s how I see it.

There are several components involved in judging how something sounds:

1. How it measures
2. Personal perceptual equipment (your ears, your brain)
3. Personal expectations (your taste, sonically and in musical content)
4. Associated equipment
5. Room acoustics

ASR likely looks at this and thinks, the only one of these which can be measured and quantified in our lab is #1, how it measures.

If ASR did measurements and only reported the facts about what they measured, no one would care. Because measurements HAVE to be related to judgments about how things sound, aesthetically, or no one would read the site.

Thus, ASR derives it’s credibility from doing (1) but it drives interest in the site by claiming that (1) correlates with (2) and (3).

This results in two related ironies.

First, ASR’s claim to correlate (1, measurement) with (2, 3 subjective sound) abandons the sites’ main claim to validity.

Second, by reaching beyond measurement, ASR repudiates it’s own purpose as a website.

Here’s a guess on my part. Most gear is made well enough that it should not matter how it measures. Something would have to distort really really badly to correlate with nearly everyone’s personal taste.

Imagine a cup of coffee -- some like it with no sugar, and some like it with up to 4 Tb of sugar. Almost no likes it with more than 4 Tb of sugar. So, if I had a website measuring sugar in coffee, I’d only start to be useful to readers if I told them that this cup of coffee had more than 4 Tb of sugar. But coffee makers already figured *that* out. So, there’d be not much to measure.

What's the solution? Have a variety of subjective reviewers who declare their taste up front. Then, readers can decide if their own tastes are similar enough to a certain reviewer in order to accept their judgments as a helpful guide (not as rule of law). This is how I choose TV or movie reviewers. I find those whose observations and judgments are motivated in ways similar to my own. Then, their additional experience and finer perceptual abilities are helpful in pushing me toward new experiences that I can estimate might be pleasing.

How good feeling it is to read a wise articulated post!

hilde45 thanks  from us all...

When I performed the measurements of the original Rogue Sphinx integrated amplifier to accompany Herb Reichert's review in the August 2014 issue of Stereophile, I was impressed by what I found. "Even without taking into account its affordable price, Rogue Audio's Sphinx offers excellent measured performance with little sign of the usual compromises made in class-D designs,"

@russ69 

That quote you made from Stereophile is from the 2014 review not what ASR reviewed. Stereophile tests appear to show high noise one phono input, high power supply noise, and does not meet 4 ohm power spec. Did ASR note any different?

The main issue I took from Goldensound's review that I posted above is that Amir tests all AES/EBU outputs at 4v.

This this ridiculous because all outputs should be measured at their normal output levels, not attenuated.

Amir is a clown and anyone that gives him the time of day is a bigger clown.

That quote you made from Stereophile is from the 2014 review not what ASR reviewed.

The first quote is the V1 version which supports the second quote for the V3 version. Both experts measured the Spinx V3 and I think got comparable results.

Stereophile tests appear to show high noise one phono input...

Yes, it is highlighted that the MM phono output was noisy. The MC output was not. Probably still has more channel separation and dynamic range than the record you are playing. 

Stereophile tests appear to show ... high power supply noise...

Also mentioned but it's 80 and 90 db down, you are not going to hear it. 

... and does not meet 4 ohm power spec. 

Rogue does not specify a 4ohm power spec. They say 100wpc minimum and don't specify the impedance. Atkinson measured 96watts at 8 ohms and 150watts at 4 ohms. You wont miss the 4db since it would take 200 watts to raise the sound level 3db.  

This is why you need to listen to gear. A few db may be important or they may not depending on what you are measuring. With noise levels down 80 and 90 db, you are not going to hear it. Sure 120 db is better but it's only a better measurement number not something that will ruin playback. That's why Atkinson explains what the numbers mean and their effect on sound quality. ASR skips that step. 

This this ridiculous because all outputs should be measured at their normal output levels, not attenuated.

As a measurement standard most amps are measured at full power. That is where they perform the best in most cases. Although we don't listen at full volume, the measurements would make more sense if they were at a realistic level but you can't compare amps if you are setting output to some arbitrary level. 

Also mentioned but it's 80 and 90 db down, you are not going to hear it. 

 

Those are peaks. The total noise level from the power supply would be much higher. In 2022 that does not seem acceptable. Is it audible? I expect at high volume in quiet passages it may be.

Now let's play devil's advocate. When it suits you you will claim -80db is not audible but if a cable was tested and it showed nothing at greater than -90db and Amir said that's totally inaudible then a 100 audiophiles on this site would be losing their minds. You can selectively accept the measurements you want especially when they are measuring the same thing.

 I noted that ASR seems to measure THD from very low power to high power at several frequencies but it does not seem to be consistent for all products

Now let’s play devil’s advocate. When it suits you you will claim -80db is not audible but if a cable was tested and it showed nothing at greater than -90db and Amir said that’s totally inaudible then a 100 audiophiles on this site would be losing their minds. You can selectively accept the measurements you want especially when they are measuring the same thing.

How do you measure in DB the addition of a piece of shungite+copper+graphene on my main comnputer  router? It is my homemade "golden plate"...Or on  the wall socket?

😁😊

These debates are ridiculous not because "measuring tools fetichists" are wrong, they are not even wrong... Like the "gear tasting fetichists" who at least use their ears...

The only meaningful measures in audio are CORRELATED with a listening impressions, it is called psycho-acoutic science...

The rest is only a debate beween Amir and the designer of a Dac for example about a RESTRICTED set of measures and ABOUT THE  DESIGN CONCEPTION  not about his quality sound ...

Because a Dac could have  a sound PERFORMANCE only in a specific room with specific ears and specific system...

 And only acoustic and psycho-acoustic can USE the dac design in real time listening...

When it suits you you will claim -80db is not audible... I expect at high volume in quiet passages it may be...

You would be totally wrong. If I heard any noise I would freak out. All my gear is dead quiet, I work hard to make sure it is. If it’s not dead quiet it gets repaired or returned. I hear zero noise from my Sphinx V3. 80 db were the peaks at certain low frequencies (Class D issues), but most of the noise was minus 100 db.

Those are peaks.

Yes, that is db down, it gets better from there.

@russ69 

 

Those are peaks.

Yes, that is db down, it gets better from there.

It appears it does not get better from there.

But if you happy with it it does not matter. I would be surprised if this was not audible in some manor.

 

Returning to the V3's performance at the loudspeaker outputs, channel separation (not shown) was the same as before, at 60dB in both directions below 1kHz and around 40dB at the top of the audioband. The V3's unweighted signal/noise ratio in the audioband, taken with the line input shorted but the volume control at its maximum, was also the same at 67.7dB left and 66.1dB right, both ref. 2.83V into 8 ohms. This was primarily due to full-wave–rectified, supply-related spuriae (fig.2), though the random noise floor components were also relatively high in level.

 

This was primarily due to full-wave–rectified, supply-related spuriae .

In other words, peaks or spikes that make the measurement seem worse than it is. In this case low frequency spuriae due to class D design. No reviewer, and I must have read a dozen reviews heard any issues in the lower frequencies, nor do I. We can go all night on this. Do you own or have you heard the Sphinx V3? No mater, either has Amir.

In this case low frequency spuriae due to class D design.

 

Can you explain what class D has to do with low frequency spurs?

I don't think anything can make it worse than -66.1db. That seems pretty bad. I did a search on Sphinx. Several users noting noise issues. I did not find anything on the V3.

Always let your ears guide you!

JD

I don't think anything can make it worse than -66.1db.

Not sure you are interested but the spuriae (peaks at certain frequencies) make the average number look worse than it is. You are just looking at the raw number and that isn't telling the whole story.

Several users noting noise issues

Links please.

You are buying audio to listen to it, not to put a meter on it and measure it. Obviously how it sounds is the most important thing.  In my own case I recently bought a Lindeman Limetree Bridge, even after it was lambasted by ASR, why, it sounded wonderful, it still sounds wonderful.  It was lambasted for high distortion, well I doubt anybody could hear 10x the distortion or even a 100x the distortion it was criticised for. We are in the zone of analysis paralysis. ASR criticised the Bluesound Node similarly, there of hundreds of thousands sold and 99% of people are probably completely satisfied. There is a great story about washing machines (sort of) a well known speaker on product quality in the 1980's showed a slide to the audience with data from experts on washing machines. They concluded which was the best washing machine. He then asked the audience who owned a washing machine, he then asked them what they thought the best brand was, the outstanding vote was Maytag.  Maytag was not the best according to the experts. At the end of the presentation he asked people who didn't have a current machine or were unhappy with their present machine what brand they would buy? Overwhelmingly they said Maytag. Because they trust the people that have got them, more than the people who measure them. Trust yourself and how it sounds to you, there is no one else who can predict that, no matter how many reviews or how many measurements.

The ASR site is useless for anyone who enjoys music. The little minions and the minion leader only worship charts. The minion leader knows very little when it comes to listenin. He was a but a project manager.

Many great thoughtful comments above most of which I completely agree with. I will say that I have enjoyed several of the ASR vids.  No, not a fanboy and his overall opinions on sound quality are to be taken with a grain of salt.

I don't care what he is measuring I just find it interesting in the sense of a procedural exercise.  

Regards,

barts

But isn't there enough gear that measures reasonably well and sounds pretty good that we can move on from poorly measuring equipment regardless of how it sounds?

we can move on from poorly measuring equipment regardless of how it sounds?

Back in the day amps strived for THD of .001. You can achieve that number by adding negative feedback, sometimes lots of negative feedback. But it turns out that amps sound better if negative feedback is reduced or eliminated. Just one example of a measurement that hurts sonic performance. 

Back in the day amps strived for THD of .001. You can achieve that number by adding negative feedback, sometimes lots of negative feedback. But it turns out that amps sound better if negative feedback is reduced or eliminated. Just one example of a measurement that hurts sonic performance. 

@atmasphere was kind enough to talk about this in detail in another topic. Paraphrasing, if the distortion is low at high frequency, then the issue you have described is not an issue. It seems many amplifiers have lots of negative feedback and they have low distortion at 20Khz.

I don't think it is back in the day any more. There are lots of amplifiers on Stereophile and ASR that have very low distortion at 20Khz. Lower than this Rogue at almost any frequency.

@onhwy61 people are emotionally attached to their purchases. I work in batteries. Look at how emotional people get in defense of internal combustion.

I had tube amps in the past. They are neither good nor bad. They just are. I have no doubt it was less accurate but I still enjoyed it at the time.

@onhwy61 

But isn't there enough gear that measures reasonably well and sounds pretty good that we can move on from poorly measuring equipment regardless of how it sounds

Interesting conclusion. Why would one want to move away "regardless of how it sounds " . For example if an audio product sounds truly superb yet measured poorly why on earth would one be motivated to move on to something  else?

The mere fact that it sounds superb renders the "poor measurements " irrelevant. It would seem logical that the poor measurements have zero bearing on the superb sound quality outcome. So I don't see why subpar measurements have any meaningful consideration if the audio product sounds fantastic.  Perhaps it's just me but I don't follow the "move on" rationale. 

product A measures well and sounds well. 

Product B measures poorly and sounds well.

Same listening outcome.  What is the inherent advantage of the better measurements if they don't yield  superior sound?

Charles 

people are emotionally attached to their purchases

I have lots of gear, no emotional attachment at all. It either does the job or it doesn't. I currently run 7 complete systems, the gear that doesn't cut it goes out to the garage system. I have a pair of Stereophile magazine class A rated speakers in the garage, they weren't cutting it so they were banished. Although I don't necessarily disagree with you. 

Rather than measures well, let's substitute reliability.  Just for this example high reliability equipment works as designed every time and low reliability equipment only works 50% of the time.  So wouldn't you want to move on from the equipment that has low reliability yet sounds superb?

Why can't you have your cake and eat it too?

@charles1dad I would take product A all other things being equal.

Of course if you substitute the term reliability in place of measurement, that’s a fundamentally  different argument. Without question I would choose high reliability compared to low reliability. But that wasn’t the point of this topic thread. Tube audio components are notorious for yielding poorer measurements as opposed to transistor audio components. 
 

Yet well made tube components are wildly recognized for their Very long lifespan/years of service with reliability. This is accomplished with their relatively comparative poorer measurements. So even here there is no correlation with test bench measurement and reliability/longevity as it regards tube equipment.

In the example above you would choose product A over product B. That’s fine. My point is those measurement do not ensure superior sound quality nor reliability. So I’m trying to determine where/what is the intrinsic advantage of bestowed by the better measurement numbers.

Charles

Tube parameters change significantly over their life. Put in a new tube it sounds like a different amplifier. It’s not the reliability that I had issue with, it was that I never knew whether my amp was operating at its best.

I enjoyed it at the time. Pick what works for you.

Superior sound is subjective. What you like someone else may hate. Many roads to the same place.

Sound.

You hear sound not graphs and measurements.

Sound, music.

You are right if you speak about the differences in gear....

But sound subjective evaluation is not only pure relative taste, it is also a LEARNED HEARING experimental journey with acoustic and psycho-acoustic experience and principles...

Difference in gear design and specs are also SUBJECTIVE and are judged by our own needs and expectations...

Difference in room acoustic are no more only subjective, you can objectively CONTROL a system/room at will and you can learn from this OBJECTIVE experiments installation the more you explore it...

That is my point...

Differences between relatively basic good gear at any price will not replace the HUGE impact of small room acoustic and psycho-acoustic control done right...

We learn to listen... Our tastes are secondary like our gear pieces are secondary if they are well chosen gear to begin with and in accordance with our wallet...acoustic is primary for our understanding of sound...

Saying the opposite is pushing people in the marketing trap of obsessive upgrading and entertain a universal ignorance about how good sound experience emerge in a specific room for our particular ears...

Also keep in mind that there exist a minimal threshold for  what may be  experienced as a good sound experience related to the S.Q./price ratio for the gear you own...One this treshold is reached and master upgrade are way less attractive...An improvement is ALWAYSpossible for sure but here the ratio S.Q./ price plays for most of us...

Acoustic cues and factors  that may be and must be controlled : timbre, bass, dynamics, imaging, soundstage, LEV/ASW ratio, etc all these acoustical cues and factors  will give us an OBJECTIVE number of "tags" and indexes all along the subjective road...

Controlled Correlation between our subjectivity and objective installation is the heart of acoustic and psycho-acoustic learning experience and experiments...

Superior sound is subjective. What you like someone else may hate. Many roads to the same place.

Superior sound is subjective. What you like someone else may hate. Many roads to the same place.

Agreed and exactly my point. You have to hear and listen to make a final choice determination. If some folks prefer to downplay actual listening,  more power to you and enjoy your scrutiny of numbers. Listening has served me well so I'll stick with that.  

Charles 

The fact that one component can measure better than another isn't the point of my earlier comment.  I believe audiophiles should not have to accept poorly measuring equipment.  The tube equipment that I see measured in Stereophile actually measure fairly well.  As a group they don't measure as well as the majority of solid state amps, but it's not as if they don't have good measurements.

@onhwy61 

I think the implication is that some people like the sound of audible artifacts. I think I may have in the past. If you make them measure well you lose the artifacts.

I think the implication is that some people like the sound of audible artifacts. I think I may have in the past. If you make them measure well you lose the artifacts.

Oy vey!

I guess I’m just not picking up the logic here. Oh well, nonetheless I do appreciate and respect everyone’s point of view on this topic.

Charles

I have to say this. No one is going to beat a dead horse. I just cleaned up after two and if that is an indication of what is inside, YOU AIN'T gonna beat any dead horse.

WOW, what has my wife been feeding them. Holy$hit! I think the oats fermented to long. The pig farm is not helping...

 I believe audiophiles should not have to accept poorly measuring equipment.  

Thanks for posting. This thread was designed to help me understand people that rely on measurements above what they hear. You make a good point but if an amp or whatever sounds good even though it has measurements different than some other amps is that amp no good? Should it be dismissed without listening? Are we measuring the right things?  Is looking at .01% difference important? Is distortion that is not audible important? We don't prefer distortion, we just don't think inaudible distortion is important.  Are we wrong? 

We appear to be measuring the right things, some people like less perfect reproduction. They like the imperfect artifacts. That is not bad.

Horse doodie’s.