Indentical measurments = Identical performance?

 

• Is there agreement and proof of each measurement’s value and the range of human sensitivity?

Is there any proof otherwise? The answer is no.

It doesn’t work that way in science. We do not make someone prove that pixies do not exist, in the same way that we do not make people prove that they’re innocent.

The proof is upon the claim maker, or prosecution, to prove guilt.

• What are the relative merits off each measurement in terms of a broad range of listeners as well as you , specifically?

Is there any proof otherwise? The answer is no.

It doesn’t work that way in science. We do not make someone prove that pixies do not exist, in the same way that we do not make people prove that they’re innocent.

The proof is upon the claim maker, or prosecution, to prove guilt.

But the merits of the measurements are documented in many places.
For instance the high distortion of tube equipment being more pleasing to the ear than much lower distortion of some SS gear.
So yes the relative measurements are not all created equal… and some measurement are harder to do than others.

• We lack measurements which can take into account the ear/brain mechanism as well as self-training of the neural pathways.

Irrelevant as it pertains to preference, not to audibility, which was covered by your first two points, and I will point out again, none proven.

In some sense, if we know the sound field, like a measurement of it, then we could assume that a reproduction of the field should look the same in the time and frequency domain. And the more “sameness” would be higher fidelity than less “sameness.”
 

 

Take a set of published tests from 1972. Now compare them to published tests from say ASR in 2022. It would be dishonest to claim that the 1972 tests are nearly as comprehensive as what is and can be done in 2022. I think the thing mainly stuck in 1972 is audiophiles, not the measurements

Ok lets take 1982, then.
We had many more measurements happening in the 80s.

And so, if put to practice, any 2 digital audio components that have similar enough measurements should sound identical. For example, a DAC with a SINAD or SNR or 120 dB vs one with a SINAD or SNR of 123. Tiny differences in linarity and frequency response above 20 KHz are not audible to us humans anyway.

I am not sure SINAD is all the most useful measurement.
If we are playing tones, then it might be, but we are playing impulsive thinks like drums and other percussion instruments as well.

Secondly if the SINAD is all 2nd harmonic, or all 5th a harmonic, will we hear a difference?

But at some point do the speakers matter? And their contribution to SINAD, or SNR, or distortion products?

@erik_squires +1. It’s called Occam’s Razor. Been around for a while. Was the basis of the scientific reasoning that created the tools that take the measurements. Now that we have the tools, we forget about the principals. It would be funny in any other age. 
 

I think the complexity of active listening is such that the technology used to measure just can’t catch up. How many million tests would be needed to capture this? Add to that, the relationships between tests (i.e. poor results at a rate against good results from a different test at a rate) and I think if any two devises test exactly the same, they weren’t tested enough. Combine this with the fact that, as others have said, the tests are being performed on the wrong side of the eardrum, I consider measurements to be nothing more than a baseline start to inform an evaluation. Will the technology catch up in a few hundred years - maybe — but It is the curse of every age to consider themselves sufficiently advanced and ‘done’. 50 years from now someone will be laughing on this forum about the crudeness of our testing processes. 
 

i have tested high voltage current at hospital facilities. 13.3k volts.  Everything tested fine. Dozens of tests using specialized equipment costing more than the most expensive audio equipment. Then, through an analog waveform capture on the feeders, and the B phase is flat coming in from the utility. My point being that every test is a snapshot of a piece of a photo. The relationships between the tests are what get you, and an analog experience (like listening) is the easiest way to get that. 

The conventional performance measurements of hi fi are summative and the wood does not necessarily describe the trees. Walking through the wood is a different experience to looking at if from an helicopter. Neither experience invalidates the other but the two are valid in different ways.

I diligently tried to read all of this but got lost and just went and listened to a James Taylor album...!🙄

Just about any decent amp measures better than almost any tube amp of almost any price in most all of the typical parameters. Look at the square wave reproduction for one good example. Does that mean the solid state amps sound better / more like live music? We all know better. 
 

That said, I’m not sure John Atkinson of Stereophile does as rarely has an overall good thing to say about tube equipment & if you believe him & his “bias”, Benchmark products should sound better than anything else at any price as they supposedly test that way. 

Can you measure willingness or enthusiasm?  Are you in the mood for music and it sounds better?  Are you in the wrong frame of mind and it just doesn't gain your interest?  Can you measure that? 

I have mulled over this very argument for over 50 years and Once again I will use a speaker as an example or a comparison as to why things that are unmeasurable or even hearable by the human ear can change the overall makeup of a sound. Just in case you noticed I already explained the whole story already. It is a matter of what one minute aspect that can't be heard affects the overall.
We should all know that the different materials used in making a speaker cone act differently at different frequencies and power levels. Also if a speaker is playing only one frequency say well within its primary intended range, it has one sound but if another frequency that might be outside of its normal range is present the first primary note reacts differently. You may not even hear the second out-of-range note, but it changes the stiffness or flexure of the cone which in turn modifies how the primary note comes out. Any portion of what makes a sound output, be it an amp, a speaker, a transistor, the room treatments, or whatever, all make up the combined sound and thus its perceived sound. We may not be able to receive a particular sound or tone, but we can recognize the effort that such a sound causes on the rest of what we do hear. A different way of putting it might be, A Note that is far beyond the human hearing range affects the overall quality of frequencies/sound which we do hear.

Who listens to asr? Measurements don’t tell you how it sounds. What is the sq difference of a dac with .005 distortion vs .0003? Good luck. Stereophile is the worst on producing bad measurements and reviewers love the sound. I never look at measurements of a dac before purchasing, I use my ears

Any competently designed DAC should nail SINAD and frequency response measurements.  That's why, on cursory listening, DACs sound the same. Only on a sufficiently resolving system/room with extended sessions will the subtle differences between DACs or similarly measuring amplifiers become apparent. You have to know the recording and you have to spend some time.  There is a lot that can go awry when reconstructing the analog waveform from 1s and 0s and if you listen, those differences will reveal themselves.  All IME and IMHO of course.

I understand both sides of the issue.  Objectivists posit that if it can't be measured, then it doesn't exist.  There is a certain logic to the notion that what we hear is a function of the measurements of a piece of equipment, or that one cable sounds different because it measures differently in some way.  Subjectivists posit that measurements are irrelevant, and that all that matters is your subjective impression of the equipment. Subjectivist opinions are therefore . . . subjective. Some will have one impression of something, others will have a different impression.

I think that there is merit to measurements but it is clearly not the be-all and end-all.  There are so many factors, such as other equipment, speakers, room acoustics, cables, power, sources, etc. that it seems that subjective analysis is the only way to decide whether a piece of equipment is good for you.  How does one measure depth and width of soundstage, for example?  How does one measure the fact that one piece of equipment has an almost 3D presentation in space while another is more 2D? Logically, if it sounds different, it should measure different. But I don't think that there is a true correlation between how a piece of equipment sounds and how it measures.  so, bottom line, identical measurements do not mean identical performance.

I saw people making unfair comments here discrediting Stereophile in a similar fashion on ASR.  Stereophile supplements their extensive listening with measurements, while ASR occasionally adds de minimis listening test in the end of measurements.  Although I look at their measurements as one of the decision factors, I understand there are other psychoacoustic components not being measurable at least based on today's technology.  That is why identical measurements (available today) can not be equated with identical performance.  I found Stereophile reviews are as such much more trustworthy.  

There are so many technical factors. Crown International in the late 1970s, 80s made some of the best built and technically measured stereo equipment in the world. Dollar for dollar the best. .00025 intermodulation .0025 THD at full rated output in their preamps. Power amps .0025 IM and .025 THD at full rated output at any of the Amplifers from their 45WPC amp to their 500WPC Stereo reference. Did they sound good? You bet!  However, if you wanted to pay the money for a less powerful amp with worse specifications that sounded remarkably better you would buy a Mark Levinson Mono Block pair with their preamp. I owned a Crown PL 1 SL1 and enjoyed it for 40yrs. Still  sounds acceptable as long as the switch buttons work for power and function. So outstanding quality. After 15 years I sent it back to Crown. They replaced one small capacitor in the power protection circuit. It all tested like new. So, testing is great.  It gives you an idea on how accurately quality control throughout is designed into equipment. But it does nothing to tell you about sound. The system might spec great but be overly bright or too robust on the same speakers. So room matching, speaker matching preamp, power amp, source are all important factors just as important as technical measurements. My old Crown equipment was so much better technically than my new tube integrated but in no way sounds as good. No contest. 

I really do not see the point of these posts. ASR is not taken seriously by those who are really interested in music. It is best to ignore them and let them argue amongst themselves.

The one thing I haven't seen mentioned is that most, if not all measurements are static. A sine wave (or two in the case of IM distortion) is fed into the device and deviations from the input are noted, or a power output recorded, etc. 

However, music is complex and dynamic. There is no guarantee that a static measurement accurately represents the device's behavior when handling a complex signal. One of the best examples of this were high-feedback solid state amps from the 1970s that measured well but sounded shrill and harsh.  Things are better these days, but there is still no perfect correlation between static measurements and musical performance. 

Then, there is also the interaction between multiple components. An amp that works well with a speaker with a benign impedance curve may not sound near as good with a difficult load. 

That said, measurements are still important, particularly when designing and manufacturing products. For manufacturing, measurements are the only practical way to maintain consistent quality control as there is no way to listen to every unit as it comes down the production line. 

Finally, don't think I'm a pure subjectivist. We are humans, and subject to both conscious and unconscious bias that have little or nothing to do with sound but which still affect a person's perception.  Just because the subject is hi-fi doesn't mean those issues don't exist.