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


I just can't clear my head of this. I don't want to start a measurements vs listening war and I'd appreciate it if you guys don't, but I bought a Rogue Sphinx V3 as some of you may remember and have been enjoying it quite a bit. So, I head over to AVS and read Amir's review and he just rips it apart. But that's OK, measurements are measurements, that is not what bugs me. I learned in the early 70s that distortion numbers, etc, may not be that important to me. Then I read that he didn't even bother listening to the darn thing. That is what really bugs me. If something measures so poorly, wouldn't you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear? Do people still buy gear on measurements alone? I learned that can be a big mistake. I just don't get it, never have. Can anybody provide some insight to why some people are stuck on audio measurements? Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep. 

russ69

Jerry123 😂😂🤭🤭

 

All of a sudden, Jerry reportedly had a stroke. At the same time you “joined” Audiogon. How convenient. Let me repeat the list of all your usernames in the past:

thynamesinnervoice

 

cindyment

 

snratio

 

yesiamjohn

 

sugabooger

 

dletch2

 

audio2design

 

dannad


roberttdid

 

heaudio123

 

audiozenology

 

atdavid

I am sure I am missing some. What a character. Creepy

If we are both a single person, then that is an impressive set of capabilities in a single person in which case you probably should sit back, be quiet, and listen.

 

How humble of you! Clearly you are a specialist in every single subject. Anything and yup, you are the superior being. Everyone should sit back, be quiet and listen. Your words. 🤦‍♂️🙄. Pathetic. I do envy you for the very powerful Google Machine you have in your possession 😉

 

If you are making excuses for racism, you need to be looking in the mirror. I found at least 4 people making this accusation of racism of said poster. 1 would be unexpected, 4 is more than a trend.

I really start to question mental health with the tin-foil olympics that goes on. I looked at some of the other accounts I am supposedly and analog to. Other than we both have a technical background, there are obvious differences in that technical background. If we are both a single person, then that is an impressive set of capabilities in a single person in which case you probably should sit back, be quiet, and listen.

+1mahgister

Thank you for the Short Ted Talk re:philosophy....very enjoyable.

Look at the little busy body we have here. What lengths he goes to when confronted. No wonder he's been ousted by A'gon mods so many times but has this compunction to keep coming back.

Quoting something from jerry is good for laughs for anyone who's been here long enough. He's accused me and others of similar things and was on his 3rd membership under a new handle when he stopped posting. Maybe he and deluded are related.

All the best,
Nonoise

Post removed 

Previous to his gender stance he was a known but not exceptional academic.

It is very important to underline and precise that Peterson did not make a "gender stance" at all...His remark which goes around the world was about free speech and the insane Trudeau who want to rule language by law...His rant has nothing to do with gender choices of people...By the way have you read "maps of meanings" his main book ? I dont know but for me no ordinary academic write a so deep book...He is not Einstein, Darwin or Freud or Grothendieck for sure but he is not an ordinary academic... Read his book and come back to speak...i read it 12 years ago... 😁😊

if a philosopher comes up with an "answer"

Philosophy importance is not about answers, it is about value, meanings and questions...

The way we question ourself and everything else matter more than technological answers...Sorry....

Even philosophers debate the death of philosophy and whether it has any meaning let alone value in a world where life’s mysteries are one by one decoded and demystified.

The so called " death of philosophy"  emerge way after the Renaissance and after the Romantic Era in the midst of materialism and mechanistic night...Blake called that the industrial age or The "tree of death", the era of Urizen...

All that is described in a more easy to understand way in another great poet and also scientist Goethe in his Faust...

Then there is no philosophy death, but instead the complete domination of materialism... The disconnection between science and philosophy was pushed by the technological hubris of occidental empire domination... Some philosophers reacted against this nominalism which success is at the source of modern physical science, Charles Sanders Peirce one of the greatest scientist and philosopher in America for example and Husserl in Europe and many others...

The "life’s mysteries" are not one by one decoded each day, like an engine or a mechanistic set of riddles, in the opposite, the area of knowledge grow like a surface and the mysteries increase like a volume... The universe is boring and understood "more" each day only by the transhumanist sect who will let the machine do the mind work and park human in box where they "will own nothing and be happy" ....

What is understood better each day is that the cosmos is a more vast mystery than we ever dream to think it was...Our little new answers are dwarved by the new questions...

Only sleepwalkers take technology at face value, knowledge is not science, and science is not technology...

Knowledge is an art and an ethic and a way to conduct our life and our body and senses among the phenomena to understand them without destroying them...It encompasses science and technology not the reverse...

Goethe is the last great artist, scientist, and poet, he does not wrote philosophy in a a way a university professor wrote it, like Hegel was, but the legacy of Goethe is urgently needed in transhumanist era more than any other philosopher...

Anyway the good news save for the transhumanist sleepwalker is materialism is dead...Alas! A.I. is not a creature of materialism, it is a creature of our imagination, and the risk is that we may put ourself captive in the box of our limited imagination under the domination of a ghost manipulated by who?...

 

@nonoise :

I noticed as much in the style and manner of writing of a few recent newcomers.

Newcomer?? LOL!! 
 

The delusional dude is on his 13th username already. If you count his posts under all his usernames, he has more posts than the rest of Audiogon users 

 

They have an official policy (not kidding), a narcissist procedure of “cat and mouse “ sort of game. They will play you from a position of competence and utmost superiority.

 

Official policy huh? :-)

I said Audiokarens as a joke. Now I am not so sure.

They will not remove you if you do that. They will keep you and will pile on you. On purpose. Like vultures. They have an official policy (not kidding),  a narcissist procedure of “cat and mouse “ sort of game. They will play you from a position of competence and utmost superiority.

Sounds a lot like what's been going on here as of late. I noticed as much in the style and manner of writing of a few recent newcomers.

All the best,
Nonoise

 

And in a funny twist, my personal lawyer is a former professional musician.

Philosophy OWNS science’s ass. Totally. Irrevocably so. Philosophy and the rigors of logic in complex extremis, is what created, framed.. and gave the playground of existence TO science.

 

Says "the guy" typing that on his cell phone or computer , developed using hard core science, communicated over the Internet (also hard core science), probability with some RF and optical thrown in (also hard core science). And what does it all have in common? All developed by people who couldn't give a care to philosophy that tries to answer questions that most people could not care less about and even if a philosopher comes up with an "answer" 10 other will disagree and 10000 people totally unaware someone was even thinking about it will still go about moving the world forward. 

Even philosophers debate the death of philosophy and whether it has any meaning let alone value in a world where life's mysteries are one by one decoded and demystified. One thing is true, philosophers don't seem to have intended philosophy to be weaponized as a justification for willful ignorance nor as an excuse for a lack of personal enlightenment and certainly not as a shield to avoid the harsh reality of knowledge.

 

http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-death-of-philosophy/9780231147781

 

@teo_audio ,

 

It took me about 5 minutes to find other academics to call out Peterson on his limited interpretations of creativity not to mention method errors in assuming even for simple creativity tests that test subjects are levelled in their existing abilities. I will leave it to you to look up what that means. I will give you a hint it is related to cultural influences on IQ tests.

 

However, it is best to simply use Jordan’s own words at 3:31 in this video, "The CAQ is also potently predicted by IQ as expected". CAQ is a creativity score.

https://m.facebook.com/drjordanpeterson/videos/did-you-know-that-creative-people-have-less-death-related-thoughts/500540930657554/

 

Jordan is well known and I even agree with many things he says including the need for creative people to have some other grounding. This is often an issue with high academic performers in physics, chemistry and engineering due to the creativity of their divergent thinking having the potential to make multiple focuses challenging.

He is well known but his ideas are not all universally accepted. Previous to his gender stance he was a known but not exceptional academic.

 

I proved for myself that a great audiophile experience can be reach AT LOW COST...

Modulo minimal control over mechanical,electrical and acoustical working domensions..

Price tag means something only in design not in sound.. The correlation between price tag and sound is MEDIATED completely by the three working domensions controls...

 

Money will always be central in our thoughts. Give in to it.  As they sing in the musical Cabaret -- "For a Buck or a Mark or a Pound or a Yen."

Idolatry of science is not science, but technology cult, see Bill Gates who want to treat viruses in biology in his last book like virus in computer... Shutting all them down at once!... Stupidity is not opposed in the same person  to a I.Q. over 120 it seems... 😁😊

Objectivistic zealots are more limited than subjectivist fetichist in the audio arena ?

Why?

Because in psycho-acoustic the EARS are king and queen...The objective installation and numbers are only the 7 working dwarves...

“ A marketing decision. Based on what they “subtly “ peddle. Just follow the money. It’s always about the money”

Like your old chum Chucky you mean !

Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money?

A marketing decision. Based on what they “subtly “ peddle. Just follow the money. It’s always about the money.

If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I’d be removed in almost seconds.

They will not remove you if you do that. They will keep you and will pile on you. On purpose. Like vultures. They have an official policy (not kidding),  a narcissist procedure of “cat and mouse “ sort of game. They will play you from a position of competence and utmost superiority.

These are the foot soldiers of projected violence, on (audio) forums, for the most part.

Yup! Well put. Someone called them the Objectivist measurements activists. I would say Militants is most appropriate. And like missionaries, they have to go places. Other audio forums. All of them. Nothing to do with music or audio.

 

 

 

Agreed. That was a great post. Reminds me of the time when I said, on another thread a while back, that it could be that objectivists can't appreciate the beauty and nuances that subjectivists do in musical recordings, or at least, anywhere near their level. That really pissed some of them off.

All the best,
Nonoise

We want to try and understand this divide, do we not?

@teo_audio Probably the best post in this thread. 

Creativity is linked to the pressure of events and more so on the freedom of the spirit...

There is two brain hemisphere, one is focus in details differentials relative to his mapping ability, the other one focus on background, and wholeness, on the territory not represented by a usable map...context attract him more than the litteral conditioned meaning...

These two hemisphere correlative working, they dont work so much well together in our own civilization after the Renaissance...Said neuro psychatrist Iain McGilchrist...

With transhumanism we assist at the suicide of the free mind...The erasure of the soul...And how many people understand this?

All creative mind are poets... The reason why is hidden in language dynamic between semantic and syntactic and acoustic correlated dynamics...i cannot enter in this here...

Some Nobel chemistry free mind professor wanted that his students wrote a poem, a sonnet, to understand this simple fact...i dont remember his name sorry...he was very wise...

If we read the great mathematician Grothendieck, his two books of 2000 pages are crossed and pollinated by metaphors deep one all the time...Then he would had thought poets with exercise in projective geometry for sure...Visualizing projective geometry is a music on his own with his system of spatial rhymes or operators...A projective sonnet so to speak... 😁😊

How about to teach audiophiles, subjective one and objective one here with mammal morphology like Goethe created it, unbeknownst to most?

Read Wolfgang Schad ,the great morphological zoologist then and prepared to be amazed without words...Or fell out of your chair...Recognizing a mammal for the first time being a grown adult who never seen one really but labelled them by habit is a great schock in one life... Try it...

Same thing apply to plant morphology, or music or complex numbers, knowing them by habit is not knowing them, it is not enough ...It is enough to work and for working in a profession yes, not enough to be creative...

Like said Robert Musil in his magnum opus " A man without qualities" there is two meaning related to the word Genius: one is linked to some ability like in the word engineer, and the other meaning is linked to the Divine ...It is like the two hemispheres version of the same word...

 

 

@deludedaudiophile

If you watch the video about creativity, (about an hour long) you’d find that not only lawyers are entirely non creative, but that it is the same largely (very largely, bordering on overtly) for scientists as well. this is partially due to the aspect of rigor and social cohesion among the group.

But that, overall, as a group, scientists are unoriginal and not creative.

At the peak of such a group, came the few imaginative creative renaissance men (at the time it was all men, relatively), who, using their creativity CREATED science as a system of well, systematic rigor. they walked right into the depths of the chaos and pulled a system of rigor and order out of it and then formalized it, for the benefit of humanity.

then, they created a different, less evolved rung of it, called engineering, where those who could not deal with the complexities of even minor creativity and imagination, could have a place to belong and be in the world, to feel good and comfortable and to move things forward in a way that satisfied them.

That system of engineering became the orignal emergent formalization of academic systems, in Bavaria in the approximately early 1720’s through the 1750’s. It’s why the Germans, to some.. have the best polytechnic schools, to this day. Formalized Engineering is their invention.

if we go down a rung, we get to those who think similarly, within the scope of how minds work, or are categorized (loosely) we end up with dogmatism replacing the idea of learning and knowing, due to metal speed differentials, different orientations in varied technical aspects, etc. (took different things in school)

If we go down another rung, we make it to the dogmatically minded who scream ’science, fool!’, but don’t know what it means, and spend some of their time crushing beer cans on their forehead, as a replacement for academic pursuit. These are the foot soldiers of projected violence, on (audio) forums, for the most part.

If you watch the video, it might be that we can’t understand each other at all, and never will. not in this life or the next. Maybe, maybe not. Can’t really tell from here.

Nothing is definite, fact’s don’t exist and all of life is illusory, ephemeral and entirely subjective. Where..there is only one single FACT in existence... there are no others. Just the one fact exists--which is that facts DO NOT exist. Quantum paradox comes to life in the parent and progenitor of science..ie..philosophy.

Philosophy OWNS science’s ass. Totally. Irrevocably so. Philosophy and the rigors of logic in complex extremis, is what created, framed.. and gave the playground of existence TO science. Those renaissance men created the concept of objectivity, or they formalized it, and built it into formalized science, and formalized academia in/and for science.

The creatives (the literal peak and pinnacle of humanity's growth and future, BTW...humanity will literally die without them), their flowery language and all the attendant mess, are the ground that places like ASR walks on. Objectivity, like facts, absolutely does not exist, as your life is entirely subjective. Objectivity is an exercise in rigor in/of logic. Objectivity is a hypnotic game we play with ourselves.

When science runs amok it can and does become weaponized by the dogmatism inherent in a notable percentage of humanity’s minds, and it begins to eat it’s own parents and children.

So, you tell me, how well such hard, logical, reasoned and sensical posting would go over at ASR.

In a word, audio superior experience in sound quality does not end with the measuring process associated with a design and does not end after buying it and listening to some design picked by ears among all those who are good enough ...

Audio superior experience comes AFTER mechanical, electrical, acoustical and psycho-acoustical controls are put in place, never mind the price tag of the gear ...Never mind the design "color" or specs sheets, if it is not TOO bad design to begin with for sure...

Then....... 😁😊

Dont argue to death about Objective/subjective attitudes, study acoustic vocabulary instead....In acoustic vocabulary all which is objective will be correlated, at least in principle,  with all that is subjective...

If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I’d be removed in almost seconds.

Being naive i tried the same thing, but i suffered the same circonstances... 😊 They recognise an amateur audiophile like me when they see one so to speak... Anyway the technological only mentality and hardwire focus is a limitation not less than people obsessed here by a gear brand name "colors"...

At least here i am not ridiculed for my creativity...

i understood at least how to control my room, how to decrease the noise floor, and to control vibrations by my own devices... So "nuts" they seems for some of them ....Some are pure acoustic and simple acoustic principles..

The most important one being:

For speaker A and speaker B there is also for ear Alpha a phantom speaker minus a and for ear Beta a phantom speaker minus b... These phantom speakers are real not only an illusion they are concrete "reflected" co-creator of the soundscape recorded in some album and emerge reflecting our own room control for each ear... The problem is to learn how control these speakers images with sound pressure level and frequencies timing waves front and reflected one for your listening position...I used different devices for that...

I used a foldable screen and acoustic crosstalk and acoustic crosfeed... In my primitive but effective way... Diffusers and resonators for sure also...Ordinary passive material treatment come first for sure but the real work begin AFTER minimal passive material treatment..... No headphones can compete at the end...

 

 

If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I'd be removed in almost seconds.

 

 

What I see being unapologetically not accepted is posts regarding listening reports where any difference by nature of the component changes must be very small, and the listening test is done with full knowledge of what is being listened to.

 

I will ask, do you have proof that their insisted methodology is wrong. Not feelings, not personal experiences, not unsubstantiated articles, but solid proof their insisted methodology is wrong?

 

I get the impression that if I demonstrated to them that things they did not accept were audulible are, they would be amenable to the idea especially if they participated. They would then analyse it 10 ways from Sunday and figure out why.

 

I am coming to the conclusion the opposite is not true. Even if it was shown that you could not hear a difference you are certain exists I don't think you would accept the results.

There is creative people in all forums....But the zealots predominate in all charcterised oriented forum...

ASR is measured oriented....

Audiogon is subjective listening very oriented...

Psycho-acoustic is NEITHER of these orentations alone...But their concrete correlation in a room...

It seems to escape most that sound cannot be explained by subjective experience

nor by electrical measures on the linearity response of processors etc...

 

 

For the I. Q. spiritual factors and cultural environment and education play a greater role, openness of the mind and senses, than strictly only I.Q.

John Stuart Mill endowed with a superhuman I.Q. is not Leonardo Da Vinci nor Goethe, not Swedenborg and not Ramanujan nor Grothendieck neither Bach...His I.Q. is the same or near them....

And the highest I.Q. ever measured, he is out of any measuring scale in fact, some give him 250 or 300, which seems plausible after reading his biography, William James Sidis was very much studied in the golden age of I.Q. testing just before and after the second world war in the US decided at 12 that he never will created new technology for agressive "apes"... Freedom was his near focus and cultures...He spoke nearly any language after few weeks... He teached in a public confrence at 11 years old at Harvard fourth dimensional geometry in 1912 answering question about the new relativity theory and his time conception as the fourth dimension compared to his own spatial interpretation......This is all redacted verifiable facts ....😁😊

He deduced in a book i  have read the existence of black hole from his own thermodynamical thinking alone... He predicted the existemce of anti matter and the existence of biological matter by his own deduction....He was 16 years old and published the book under alias at twenty years old... he despised in an obsessive manner all aspect of publicity...He published books under aliases... Anyway, who among human will be proud to beat an ape at chess? His life is science fiction stuff... I speak about for those curious...His talents will humbled every one among us who think he is intelligent... Try him...It is an exrercise in humility for those who think their 20 points over the 120 barrier is a big deal... 😁😊It is not... It is only the door to a profession sorry...

 

 

Creativity is linked to the freedom of the mind soul and spirit more than to i.Q. But for sure people who struggle mentally are chained by their too numerous limits more than others...Thats all there is between I.Q. and creativity passed this 120 I.Q. barrier...

 

 

 

Thus it draws the linear minded conservative types to it like a zealot is drawn to correcting error as it sees danger to itself in those differences. This mind type will NEVER stop trying to kill it off with all the force of it’s being.

 

Really now. I have read some of the political discussions here. Pretty conservative bunch.

 

Your post, a hostile diatribe at best, at worst is ultimately an attack meant to silence an opposing view while disguising it as freedom fighting. Your post lacks humanity, understanding, and most of all shows a lack of creativity of thought in your inability to understand an opposing view.

To exaggerate for framing and parallax depth of view creation..... this is why ASR is not about creative people, at all.

 

I would estimate that overall the intelligence of ASR posters is above average. As opposed to typing unfounded meritless attacks that further the divide as opposed to bridging a gap which you claim to want to do, how about spending 5 minutes on Google? The correlation between intelligence and creativity is well known and researched. The relationship breaks at about 120, i.e there is no additional advantage but even studies show it may extend.

Product, process and device physicists and engineers are literally tasked with doing what has never been done before, or doing it cheaper, more efficiently, etc. They spend much of their working life creatively applying the knowledge they have obtained. Knowledge is their tool just like a guitar is a tool to the musician. It is not their failing that you do no not see the creativity in what they do.

I would be more concerned with why it bugs you so much when all they do is measure equipment and publish results. It's a rather unemotional thing.

not true at all. the negativity at that website is allowed to run rampant. It's out of balance.

the balance attempt is evident at audiogon, as you are allowed to post here.

If I tried to post at ASR, similar to how I post here at audiogon.....I'd be removed in almost seconds.

So no, it's entirely emotional over at ASR, with a false cloak of reason and correctness as a cover story.

That brings me to another point about the products reviewed by ASR and their ilk. Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money? 

 

I would be more concerned with why it bugs you so much when all they do is measure equipment and publish results. It's a rather unemotional thing.

We want to try and understand this divide, do we not?

The longer a question sits unanswered, the greater the error in the formulation of the question. Not the grand question, mind you, but the complexity and the points of debate and qualities/bits of the given question, that sits in our individual minds.

Here is an overtly critical aspect of the question component set --that few ever venture into finding and understanding. It goes deep into everything in our world.

It’s the why of mathematics, and science, and linearity in thinking, and dogmatism, scientism, the why of the idea and execution/creation of ’engineering’ by the renaissance creative types...and so on.

Why such things like excellence in open creativity is not just feared but hated with passion by a notable percentage of human population. Why the ’natural’ (person who can do impossible seeming things) is feared and hated. Why Pareto distribution exists.

To exaggerate for framing and parallax depth of view creation..... this is why ASR is not about creative people, at all. ASR is a love letter to human mental linearity tied to being a blunt instrument of war, based in very deep fundamental fears against the creative and adventurist lateral thinking mind. Why it will, as long as humans exist as they do..why it will remain among us.

ie, music is about creativity and lateral expansion, flowery language (in high end audio), which is required in the creation of the new (the new in audio, finding it’s voice, solving those complex unknowns)... and measurement is about hammers and boxes, and safely marching up and down the square in green uniforms.

If one wants to understand these never ending discussions, and why they will not end, ever....then this is an essential video.

This is about music, this forum. this is filled with the creative types, in at least some greater part of their expression, overall.

Thus it draws the linear minded conservative types to it like a zealot is drawn to correcting error as it sees danger to itself in those differences. This mind type will NEVER stop trying to kill it off with all the force of it’s being.

It’s a fight between consciousness and unconsciousness, in life and living to some degree, in the expression of human growth and having a viable growing future.. Probably more than you might think.

forums like audiogon, the idea of subjective reality and creativity is 1,000% essential to to humanity and it’s future.

Whereas... the idea of ASR, is to kill that, with vehemence. To kill the very thing that gave it life, shape, and a future. Excessive rigor and framing to the point that it has no future, as real world paths have curves, skips, blanks, and meandering.

Overt Linearity kills, if it is taken too far. Scientific rigor also has it's very important place! It’s a simple fact tha overt rigor, imposed - is dangerous to creativity. rigor and framing and linearity is good in the main/middle but not in the sum. If one watches the video in this post and, critically...understands it contents... this will become quite clear.

My post goal is to motivate people to think before throwing money...Especially nowadays...

That brings me to another point about the products reviewed by ASR and their ilk. Why the obsession with what other people spend on gear and their insistence that anything over $1500 is just wasted money? 

Over this fight between " gear tasting fetichists" and "measuring obsessed zealots", all of them are anyway mesmerized by the gear importance, focused on a brand name to listen to it or to measure it anew ... Why not?

I use the term "Acoustic Analphabet" to describe the two warring groups...

Only acoustic and psycho acoustic can explain sound experience and make us able to not only control all his factors with ANY system at ANY price but also learn each of these OBJECTIVE factors with SUBJECTIVE listening experiments and integrating them in our body/room with the right devices and measures in acoustic balanced treatment but especially in acoustic optimal mechanical control...

We can operate and control a room/speakers relation at will or not...

If not,we can imagine that the peak of the audiophile experience will be changing an amplifier for another costly amplifier... 😁😊

The fact that one measure better than the other means little if you locate the system in a bad room...And all uncontrolled room are relatively "bad" unbeknonwst to the owner who will vouch for this acoustically unverified claim that his room is good... The difference between a room controlled and uncontrolled exceed almost any upgrade in improvement power... Save upgrading a 100 bucks amplifier for a 100,000 bucks one...Or a really bad one for a really great one...No normal usual upgrade can compare to acoustic mastery...

 

This upgrading obsession is the first symptom of acoustical analphabetism....

By the way the basic vocabulary of music is not the basic vocabulary of audiophile, and the basic vocabulary of audiophile is not the basic vocabulary of acoustic...

Then we must learn to translate one vocabulary into the other...

The rosetta stone is the relation between speakers A and B and ear A and B ...

 

 

A stereo system sound optimal when we feel like there is almost 4 speakers in the room sometimes, relatively to the recording....Is it not incredible? No it is not quadraphonic, only stereo well done...In some recording we are on the stage and the musicians are around us...There is an acoustical way to mechanically create these sound impressions...

How many experience that?

This is acoustic power...

After that upgrading is preposterous in most case if the system is relatively already well chosen for sure...And well chosen is not related here to price tag....

My post goal is to motivate people to think before throwing money...Especially nowadays...

 

I have already coined Audiokarens. That’s for audiohiles who tie their self worth to their equipment purchaes and get bent out of shape when measurements show it’s not as perfect as they told everyone or it is of questionable benefit.

How about the concept of reserving the term audiophile for those interested in sound and music, while coining a new term such as

Audiospecophiles for those interested in the measurements of gear?!?

Tube equipment won’t spec as well as transistor.

It seems Amir does not make any concessions to design type, where as Stereophile makes comparisons to similar designs, not chalk and cheese. If the piece under test doesn’t measure as well as an A/B Solid State amp with some solid feedback, it fails and doesn’t even deserve a listen. The vast number of high-end tube equipment on the market must suggest that many like the way tube gear sounds in no compromise systems.

I am not stuck on audio measurements!  I am stuck on what it sounds like. That's all that matters. The bifrost DAC flunked the test measurement of an expert tester that is popular. Hey, it sounds great!  My ears tell the story. Tube equipment won't spec as well as transistor. My ears tell me it sounds better on my system. That's all that matters. 

we can simulate/model how that will change the frequency response. 

I seem to have an attraction to hard to drive loudspeakers. Some with wild impedance swings and nasty phase shifts. I had one amp that totally rejected one frequency with one loudspeaker and a switch to another amp proved there was not a speaker issue (other being hard to drive). Not sure you can simulate that without using the loudspeaker. 

Amp and speaker interaction cannot be simulated in lab amplifier measurements. Most all loudspeakers vary dramatically in load to an amp. Testing the amp and speaker separately is not an accurate measurement of how the components work together. Some speculation can be made sometimes but not always. So the method used is measuring with a simulated 4 ohm load and a simulated 8 ohm load but that is not how the system is operating.

 

My EE circuit skills at this level are not superb, but my expectation would be this is a factor of the stability of the amplifier which could be impacted by the impedance of the load compared to a pure resistance. I would expect amplifier designers such as Atmasphere consider this, and also that for most standard speakers (not electrostatic for instance), they expected range of speaker reactance is not so great they cannot account for it. When I was researching speaker impedance after discovering the high resistance cable, I noted that the phase angle seemed to be bounded though my research was not extensive.  It seems an inherent element of most speakers is some significant series resistance.

 

This is a good point but not the nature of my question. If the amplifier has a characteristic output resistance that is significant, then knowing the characteristic input impedance of the speaker, we can simulate/model how that will change the frequency response. This has been validated by an EE strong in circuits so I am confident that is correct. I believe that would be dominant over distortion, but I am not fully confident in that belief.   I do understand that high output resistance would also impact woofer movement which may not be easily modelled.

 

 

can I surmise with some accuracy that high output resistance of the average tube amplifier compared to the average solid state amplifier with typical speakers will be the dominant contributor to "sonic signature". 

Amp and speaker interaction cannot be simulated in lab amplifier measurements. Most all loudspeakers vary dramatically in load to an amp. Testing the amp and speaker separately is not an accurate measurement of how the components work together. Some speculation can be made sometimes but not always. So the method used is measuring with a simulated 4 ohm load and a simulated 8 ohm load but that is not how the system is operating.  

Most of the differences we hear between amps is their distortion signature, to which most audiophiles refer to as the ’sonic signature’. I’ve described how the distortion affects the sound of the amp earlier.

 

Based on my newfound expertise wrt speaker cable resistance (or at least unusual speaker cable resistance), can I surmise with some accuracy that high output resistance of the average tube amplifier compared to the average solid state amplifier with typical speakers will be the dominant contributor to "sonic signature". It is able to make significant changes in system frequency response which I do not think anyone will argue with would be audible.

 

On the other issue, for all the paragraphs written, I do not perceive that O telling S what sounds best is the dominant issue or even much of an issue beyond some zealotry (much of that on both sides). I see that more as a deflection of the real issues of whether S can really hear the differences they claim exists and that O says do not exist.  I think the average O may have some thoughts on what is "likely" to be pleasing to a wide audience based on tests by respected O's, but would accept that not everyone has average preferences.

You posit they'll all sound the same,  apparently, you trust the measurements over human sensory perception.

We need to be clear about something. You specified that the measurements would be the same, and I have to assume that includes all measurements, not just 'some'. If that is true then indeed they will sound the same, having the same bandwidth, same distortion spectra, same distortion vs frequency curve, same output impedance and so on... yes, they will sound the same.

My point is that the important measurements just simply are not made nor presented. 

Most of the differences we hear between amps is their distortion signature, to which most audiophiles refer to as the 'sonic signature'. I've described how the distortion affects the sound of the amp earlier.

I've promised myself this is the last time I enter o vs s. I can only hope it holds. I only know I've said everything I've have to say.

If I had a nickel for every time this topic has come up, 
I'd have a bunch of nickels. 

 

@sns 

Touche!

Listening to music is an emotionally pleasurable experience. I'm very grateful  to be able to recognize and appreciate that it is truly a gift to mankind to enjoy. There is a music genre for every cultural and individual taste.

Charles

Again, I can't speak to all o, buy my understanding of their position is that as imperfect as present measurement protocol is, if that is even an admitted liability, it is still superior to the most skilled listener in ascertaining component and system sound quality. The senses are not and cannot be relied upon vs measurement.

I consider myself entrenched in using objective measurements and I agree you can't paint all with the same brush but this isn't my position as far as someone building a system they enjoy. 

This divide between O and S comes from the focus on electronic tools and components...

They together ignore the psycho-acoustic and acoustic impact which is way over some "taste" for gear or over some "measurements" evaluation of the same gear...

That is life, acoustic is more complicated to decipher and read about than a few electrical concepts charts about an amplifier...

A room was a hard task to master...For me....

😁😊

Some say: garbage in from the source ,garbage out from the source...

I will say if your speakers/ room is acoustic garbage your head will be too....Nevermind the source...

It is way more easy to afford a relatively good dac than a relatively good room...

And you dont know your room if you dont work it....