Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?

@invalid 

Verified by perpetual blind tests I presume?

Not at all. I thought you all didn't believe in that.  I am just trying to fit in....

I should add that as soon as Schiit started to measure their products, their performance shot up through the roof.  It created a new market for them with that improved performance.  So there is business opportunity there for companies.

I have plenty of this data.  It falls in these categories:

1. Company never bothered to make any measurements.  You can count on this being the reason in just about any audio tweaks (cables, etc.).  I know this because they are often surprised by my measurements.  But when I ask them for theirs, they have none.

2. They make very rudimentary measurements often using obsolete audio analyzers that don't remotely present the deep dive that I provide in ASR reviews.  One of the main reasons for this is the cost of instrumentation.  A proper audio analyzer sets you back US $30,000.  A proper speaker measurement requires spending $2K to get measurements in anechoic chamber or buying $100,000 Klippel NFS that I have.

3. They have the right measurements but don't want to publish them.  Harman as noted falls in this category with their speakers.  Their marketing department thinks it will be "confusing" to people if they publish detailed measurements.  Engineers and product planners disagree and leak it in forums and such.  So the information is there but not in product pages.  

Note that #3 is quite rare.

Note that even if you had measurements on cables for example, they would be useless.  I don't know about you but I don't listen to cables.  Or power conditioners.  Or AC cables.  I listen to the output of my audio system.   You would think if these things change the output of your system, these companies would be anxious to show them in measurements.  Or failing that, using controlled listening tests.  You get neither.

Instead, companies talk about such things as "lower noise," "EMI," "Jitter," yet no measurements are shown.  Instead, some theories are put forward that sound good to consumers.  Sadly some audiophiles buy into these unproven claims so companies think "life is good so why bother."

The industry is transforming though because if they don't measure, then I might.  :)  Smart company would want to get ahead of the game and make their own measurements.  And offer them.  Schiit for example when through this major change from using obsolete measurement gear to what I have now.  Reports are now released with every new product.  

Audiophiles have gotten quite a bit more educated and are driving this change.  I routinely hear from companies saying people want me to measure their gear before they buy them.

I hope every audiophile is supportive of more information than less and will push the industry to provide comparable and reliable information about their products.

@tantejuut 

4) On the other hand, people should not make claims about the hearing capabilities of other people. If multiple people subjectively can describe parameters of a component that can’t be supported by measurements (yet) it should be taken as a starting point for further investigation. 

Yes, further investigation would be for said people to conduct a blind test to make sure that only their ears told them that.  If other senses were involved, naturally measurements would not show it because we are only measuring sound.

With respect to many audio tweaks like cables, the above test is dead simple as levels don't change.  So all you have to do is hide the identity of what is being changed and see if the listener can detect the change at least 8 out of 10 times.  You can take seconds or days to listen for such a change.  And do so in your own relaxing home environment, system and music.

If you don't want to do that, then the road ends there really.  No sense in then insisting that you are "hearing" a difference.  Enjoy your system and music but don't engage in trying to convince others that you are right.  You will lose that argument in any evidence based discussion.

@tantejuut

We don’t all have 1000+ people at hand to conduct (DBX) tests for any statistic significance. Or have expensive test equipment. Interpret measurements correct and be humble about your personal bias as a tester or audiophile. I can live with that.

Yes, you only need one person, you, to conduct the quick test I described above. As long as your listening tests have statistical strength -- hence the 10 trials -- you will have my attention for sure. We will take on the task of measuring and recreating the listening test to see what is going on.

And yes, being humble goes a long way. I have lost track of how many times I have been wrong in sighted/uncontrolled listening. After a while, you learn to not put forth such testing to have any strong value.

On tester bias, I am not following you. When I measure a piece of audio gear, it is the instrument which generates results and it doesn’t have bias. Yes, you can come up with tests that are not credible such as talking about this and that characteristic of a cable. As I explained, we don’t listen to cables directly so such information while sometimes useful, is not proof of efficacy. The proof is what sound comes out of an audio device/speaker/headphone.

For the above reason, my tests focus on output of audio device. If it never changes across testing a large number of such tweaks, it does put such products on their back, making it doubly important that listening tests be conducted such that they only reflect sound and are beyond mere guessing.

@westcoastaudiophile 

@amir_asr "They make very rudimentary measurements often using obsolete audio analyzers” 

Dear, your APx555 with -117dB NF is outdated to measure my -124dB NF DAC :-), not talking here about RFI/EMI noise polluted environment. 

nice try though! 

I already corrected you on this in the last thread.  Here is the results of a recent review again:

As you see the analyzer has no problem measuring dynamic range of 130 dB for this DAC.  Your 124 dB DAC is good but is 6 dB or one whole bit worse than this unit.  If you are charging more than a few hundred dollars for it, I suggest going back and redesigning it to lower its noise unless you are having noise pollution as you mention.

You also looked up the wrong spec for APx555 analyzer.  The -117 dB is THD+N.  This is a worst case spec (company is very conservative in this manner).  I am able to measure THD+N to -124 dB:

With FFT analysis like above, we can dig as low as we want as far as distortion spikes anyway.

@fleschler 

Imagine,  my neighbor's $1/2 million system and he was strangling the sound using Pangea power cables (he has high end speaker, ICs and digital cabling).  Once he replaced them with superior design and manufactured cables, he (and I) now enjoy great sound.  

So half a million dollar didn't get him great sound?  All the money went toward what exactly in those components?  Produce mediocre sound?  Did he think that before you showed up?  Did he apologize for how poor the system sounded before you introduced him to these cables?

Or... did he think he had assembled an amazing system?  That improper listening test made him think new cables did anything?  Go back to his home and do a blind test of the new cables vs Pangea.  Repeat 10 times and let's see if he can tell them apart 8 out of 10 times.  Otherwise, let's leave fantastical stories involving one's imagination out of a thread discussing measurements....

@coralkong 

They lost me for good after hooking up a $400 power cable to a $500 DAC and then stating that it measures, and therefore sounds, exactly the same as a $30 power cable hooked to the same DAC. Uh-huh. 

huh indeed.  You are telling me with straight face that a much more expensive audio product was shipped with poor AC cable as to need another one for $500???  If you paid thousands of dollars for it, what on earth did that money go to if it is not independence from mains interference or whatever the new cable supposed to do?

If there ever is a backward logic, it is that.  That your expensive, boutique audio products are not engineered well enough that they need all sorts of tweaks. I would think it is an insult to their designers that you would want to mess with their products this way. 

The products I use to test with these cables are state of the art despite their reasonable costs.  And they show that if you buy a performant audio product, they are in need of no tweaks.  This is demonstrated both with measurements and music null tests.

@fleschler 

@coralkong  Really?  Or course!  That's why I tell non-audiophiles not to purchase expensive cables or tweaks because they won't hear a difference if the rest of their system is below mid-fi.  

How are you judging their system to be "mid-fi?"  Just looking at the price?  Who says you are right?  Do you not care that you are being condescending to them in that manner?

Fortunately that is the right thing to tell them because none of these tweaks have been shown to make a difference to sound when only the ear is involved.  So no harm is done....

@coralkong 

Put the multimeter down and try listening with your ears. You might be amazed at what you discover.

This is what irks me immensely.  Why on earth do you weaponize one of the main things we have in common?  The enjoyment of music?  Do you really think we don't listen to music?  That we don't use our "ears?"  Why build cheap/false talking points like this?  If you have a logical, technical argument, make it.  But for heaven's sake, don't resort to cheap shots like this. 

That aside, half of my reviews involve listening tests.  That is about 150 reviews a year which dwarfs any other reviewers out there. And of course any audiophile.  So don't tell me to listen.  I do and I know the limitations of that task for evaluating audio gear.

And we all experience what you do: the falsity of changes that are not real.  I have done AB tests of the cables sighted just like you do and reported those outcomes in reviews.  They are worthless and I indicate it as such.  And I note often how the cheap generic cable "sounded better."

So please, in this informed discussion, leave aside lines like this.  

@jerryg123 

What’s really great is @amir_asr slams a line of affordable cables…

Thanks for acknowledging that. A $10 bottle of water is also affordable.  It doesn't mean they get a free pass to claim health benefits for it over a $1 one.

If a $100 cable is no better than a free one that came with your gear, then the truth needs to get out about that as well as a $1000+ cable.  Maybe to you $100 is nothing but for others, it is good money they don't want to throw out.

@fleschler 

@westcoastaudiophile I don’t know of any high end/expensive/boutique cable manufacturers who provide testing measurements of their cables.

Iconoclast does. They have extensive specifications/measurements. Alas, none of that resulted in better/different sound:

@fleschler 

@westcoastaudiophile No, I absolutely don’t believe that. After testing 100s of cables, I know for a fact on various systems, that the most expensive cables are often inferior (sounding). 

That is not "fact."  It is hyperbole with no proof of sound changing.  In just an afternoon, you could turn that into fact by only using your ears in a blind test to see if you can distinguish any of those two cables.  Repeat the test 10 times so that we know you are not guessing.  

Until then, what anxiety must be there to think there are so many cables with different sound instead of sitting back and enjoying music like we do....

@westcoastaudiophile 

@amir_asr "Do you really think we don’t listen to music?”using your own jargon, what “irks" me is a claim as you are able to distinguish in your listening tests between 0.001% and 0.005% THD sources, employing ~5% HD speakers, and unknown real load HD amp.

I haven't said that so it shouldn't irk you.  What should make you upset is folks paying orders of magnitude more, only to get a less performant audio device. 

Many people here say as actual "A” SQ quality is better than “B”, even if setup “B” includes lil better measured standalone component, assuming integrated system performance. 

That's not remotely what they say.  They say they buy gear based on what they "hear."  They completely ignore measurements.  All they have to do is demonstrate that they only used their ears and we will be pals.  But they refuse to close their eyes and provide no other means to connect the experience to only what they hear.

@laoman 

You still have not answered if you actually ever check whether Yang sends you off the shelf products or cherry picked ones. This is now the fourth time I have put this to you. Scared?

Fourth time?  I have only seen it now.  First, no, John doesn't send me anything.  He is an engineer there.  I have had a contact there way before John worked there that sends me equipment.

Every Topping product comes with audio measurements -- what OP was asking about.  They were doing this before I started measuring gear.  It is not a surprise then that their gear measures well.  They optimize and verify their designs as part of their own engineering process -- what every audio company should be doing.

As to your allegations, when this came up a couple of years ago, my contact there offered that I go and buy everything I have tested from them at their expense to verify that no golden sample is picked.  I consider Topping very ethical and accept their word that the speak the truth here.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, put it forward.  Otherwise, the allegations are uncalled for.  And at any rate, would apply to every reviewer out there getting company samples which means 100% of the gear sites like Stereophile, Soundstage, joe reviewer, etc. tests.  Have you voiced objections about them in the same manner?

Keep in mind that these are not mechanical product subject to large variations.  Yes, there can be minor differences in performance of components but nothing significant can be achieved.

Finally, members from time to time send me samples they have purchased to remeasure and compare against company supplied ones.  So far, none have produced different results to indicate any gold samples are picked.

I suggest if you are going to call a company's conduct into question, that you work on some evidence to back it.  They surely deserve not having their reputation soiled just because you felt like it.

@coralkong 

I was done with ASR a while ago, and you haven't changed my opinion.

No worries. I am only responding to what people write about me/ASR.  Stop doing that and I won't interact with you.  

@fleschler 

"As to tweaks, I say try it and if you like the sound results, keep it. "

Excellent advice.  I would just make sure you only use your ears in such an evaluation.  They are trivial to test this way because they don't change any linear aspects of the device (levels, frequency response, etc.).  Have a loved one add or not add the tweak 10 times and see if you can tell the difference 8 out of 10 times.  Take all the time you need.  Let your ears and only your ears be the judge and not fall for statistical error.

If you do pass such a test, repeat with capturing a video of it and we have something wonderful to discuss!  If you can't do that, then measurements, null tests, engineering analysis of what is going on, etc. are great help in getting to truth of the matter.

@fleschler 

2. As to the ragged frequency response so obvious in the bass, I had two friends accompany me pre-power cable change and the Golden Ear remastering engineer friend blurted out that it sounds terrible. He is high functioning slight autistic so he just let loose. We heard as well but didn’t know why with such great gear. 

You didn't know?  Every system, and I repeat, every system out there will have uneven bass response regardless of price once placed in a room.  Below transition frequencies of a few hundred hertz, the room dominates the frequency response of the speakers.  You can pour millions of dollars into electronics and speakers and it will not be fixed.

The cheapest and one of the most effect solution is equalization which sadly many subjectivists audiophiles don't deploy.  With it, you can pull the peaks down and not only make the response more even, but also reduce the distortion from the speakers.

You can attempt to use acoustic products as well but the wavelengths are so large and energy so huge that you can barely make a dent in it < 100 Hz.  By the time you put enough of them in there you room can wind up too dead which is unpleasant especially for acoustic/orchestral/big band music.

A power cord will do absolutely nothing for this as this effect (modal response).  Yes, you can imagine that the bass has gotten "tighter" post such a change but it is a false impression which disappears after the psychological effect of the change is gone.

If you disagree, post a before and after frequency response measurement of your room with or without your favorite power cable.  

If this knowledge is new to you, I highly suggest reading Dr. Floyd Toole's book: Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms

The book costs much less than the money that was wasted on said power cords.

If you rather watch a video, here it is as well:

@laoman 

Amir this is blatant nonsense. Are you saying that adding better quality capacitors, improved shielding,  an improved power supply, high voltage transformers and decoupling the power supply does not lead to a significant improvement?

First, you don't seem to follow the discussion.  Poster claimed that power cables cure modal response of the room.  They do not in any form or fashion.  Physics dictate that.  

As to your new independent claim,  you are being very vague.  Of course a good power supply needs to be designed internal to your audio gear for it to perform well.  This is mandatory.  Once there however, you screwing around with power cables, filter, conditioners, etc. is all useless.  Completely useless.  I have shown this extensively across countless products I have tested.

The best test of this is on purpose feeding audio gear highly distorted AC.  My lab AC generator can produce chopped AC.  When I feed that to decently designed audio gear, it makes zero change to its output.  As it should be.  No decently designed power supply assumes clean AC.  It converts AC to very clean DC so anything you do up front is useless. See: 

This is the AC quality in my my house:

I changed that to this chopped AC:

Look at how much more distorted the waveform is.  Yet it made no difference whatsoever to the soundwaves out of the audio gear.

No impact whatsoever.  If this didn't change the sound, what on earth do you think a different power cable does???

In every review of cables, I show measurements of the cables themselves as well.  Many times they don't even do the things you think they are doing!  In a number of cases, they are more susceptible to noise than other way around.  You are a complete victim of power tweak companies if you think any of them improve the sound of your system.  

Be a good consumer: ask these companies to provide measurements and controlled listening tests.  Don't become their PR people, making arguments that have no foundation in reality like what I am responding to.

@holmz 

I would make my own power before I considered GR Research…

Good for you!  That youtube channel is a sales channel.  Sometimes there is good technical info but at all times, the aim is to sell, sell, and sell.  On the topic of power cables from them, best to stay far, far away.  See my review of his cable:

 Not only does it not provide audible benefit, it is pain in the neck to use as well!

@fleschler 

As a beta tester for GroverHuffman cables, we have tried half a dozen Furutech A/C & IEC plugs over several decades.  We found that the more expensive ends tended to be brighter sounder with higher resolution and the lower end plugs maintain more body.  After trying many plugs from other companies, Grover found a Taiwan all copper plug that had good grip, excellent build qualities, a neutral sound resulting in great body and adequately high resolution to use with his power cables.  They cost less but sound (or lack of sound) great. 

So where are the measurements for that which you said in your OP products should come with?  Quoting you:

One would think that manufacturers used tests and measurements to design and construct their products. 

@coralkong 

"Then you got called out on GR’s channel (in the end......by name)."

Of course he does.  I point out when that his products don't perform with an array of tests.  Such as that cable that barely functions as a power cable.  While I have praised some of his products, he does produce some really, really bad ones:

He relies on his viewers knowing less about audio than him. Don't be that viewer....

@dabel 

@amir_asr, any chance that Ranch invite to Sisters OR. happened some years ago. 

Steve's offer of visit was very kind.  But post my review, I am not sure the invite was still good.  :)

Seriously, we used to go to Sisters for quilt festival which my wife loved to attend.  Covid put a halt in that so we haven't been that way anymore.

I put the first one on the amp. It replaced a similarly priced well regarded cable. No contest. More air, better separation, more dynamic.

Why is it that all these tweaks always add "air?"  I mean if this were a tire, by now it would be blowing up with all that air pumped into it!!! 😁

And why did they build an air-less system to start before this tweak?  Did the designers of his system really forgot to put air in them?  It needed a new AC cable to put the air back in?

I mean the guy builds a half a million dollar system and then makes another tweak.  Bam!  The system now has more air.  Really?  Half a million dollar didn't get all the air you ever needed or wanted?

And what if the original music didn't have air in it to begin with?  Isn't it now full of air that doesn't belong there?

Or maybe, and I am just spit balling here, that the way audiophiles do listening tests with their eyes is wrong.  Just do the darn test blind.  Test a dozen times and see if you can tell the tweak has done anything.  Don't confuse people with these false conclusions.  

@dabel, I thought so but wanted to make sure others could follow the conversation as well.  

@fleschler 

He's baaaack to instill his great knowledge over us.  I guess business is slow or he feels compelled to save his site (for us, against us, who knows)?   

Oh.  You had named ASR in your OP and lamented lack of measurements for cables so I thought I ask you about your cable to see how genuine you were in your thread started.

Since you have no measurements, do you have an idea of how much air it will inject into my system?  And the hours of burn in it requires to do that?

@fleschler 

@amir_asr Please do not bother the cable manufacturer.  We don't care how much air is injected into your system (who knows what that is as @kota asks) or how long the burn in is (about 24 hours) for your system. 

Well, @kota claimed the Audioquest Go-4 cable I was testing on ASR needing 200 hours of burn in:  

"If you want performance you need to get NEW cables on loan from a DEALER who has a return policy. Then, after around 100 hours of brek in, go for it."

How do you reckon he figured out the 100 hour number for any test system but you can't?   When you were experimenting with the cable you were building, did you wait 100 hours between every change to see the results?  If not, where do you think he got these numbers?

As to air, I am very disappointed that you think your cables can't do that for me.  What are the qualifications for systems which can accept such air from your cable?  Are they listed on manufacturer website?  Or is it a random thing and what you say about improvement may not be there at all as you are implying with my system?

And why is it a "bother" for manufacture to provide such specific data?  You created a thread asking manufacturers to provide data to us as customers.  Now you say we shouldn't bother them??? Are they in a privileged position with no competition as to us treating them special in this regard?

Really, you seem to be saying other cable companies should do this and that the one  you are involved in, should be exempt?   

@kota1 

Remember, don’t ask for double blind tests unless you do them yourself:

That's like asking your doctor if he knows how to practice medicine!  Of course I have performed double blind tests.  I have not only done them, I have post them online many times.  I show a number of them in this video including techniques for passing difficult ones:

Have you run any such tests?  Has @fleschler run any to show effectiveness of the cable he is promoting?  

@amir_asr , you need to check your source, I said 100 hours to burn in a cable. 

What do you think I am talking about??? You claimed the Audioquest cable requires 100 hours with no facts backing it.  I am now asking @fleschler who has been involved in design of some cable and is promoting here, what the burn in is for that.  And why it is that it won't pump air into my system as a matter of principle.  I didn't know cables were picky about who is trying to use them.

As for your search for a cable with more "air", may I present the iFi Supanova!!

What is wrong with the cable @fleschler is selling us on?  It lacks a compressor to put in any air???  How many hours does the ifi take to burn in before said air feature comes on?  I WANT MY BLOODY AIR!!! 

So, I don’t see how the video you posted would help a member test cables or other components.

I explained how you do that in the video.  Setup your system such that you don't know which cable is used (cover/hide it).  Then have a loved one randomly switch one cable for the other.  You keep score of which is which as does the person doing the switching for you.  Do this 10 times and see if you can correctly identify one cable at least 8 times.  Seeing how in sighted tests major fidelity changes are reported, then this process should back that up.  If not, then the sighted tests are faulty.

If you are unwilling or unable to do such tests, then my measurements and null tests are an excellent substitute.  In some cases I have actually provided the captured outputs of the system so you can use any ABX software tool to compare them.

So very easy to do when it comes to cables (or any other audio tweak) which is the topic of this thread.

@fleschler 

“I went out dining, and let me tell you, that casserole was so accurate. I loved its linearity. I measured it.“

Food is the same as the music.  It is the creation.  Don't confuse that with playback which plays similar role to the plate that the food comes on.  You don't want to have a dirty plate and you certainly don't want your plate to add flavor to your food.  Some of you seem to not only want to violate these rules, but also pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for the privilege of it!

That aside, was this whole thread a farce?  You actually don't want to see measurements for cables?  You were playing with us?

@axo1989

Yoga practice is the key to good breathing I think. Exhale ego, inhale air.

Thanks coach.  Do you hold classes on this everyday or every other?

My dog is a big believer in yoga by the way:

Another possibility: as we know, in audio terminology air is the frequency band at the top of the treble range starting around 12-14 kHz. Older gentlemen can’t hear it so well.

Good thinking.  Going by topic of this thread, there should be age ratings for said cables.  That way, the older audiophiles wouldn't waste money on them.  

@invalid

Accuracy is a myth in audio playback, no system sounds like live unamplified music, so why not just use what you enjoy to listen to. 

Don't tell that to a lot of people around here.  Many think the purpose of the audio system is to replicate live music! 

But yes, you are right that a recording is never the same as a live presentation.  Once created though, you don't want to a) put in tweaks that make no audible difference but cost money and b) overlay the same tonality on everything you play. If you do, that is fine but just don't advocate it as being "higher fidelity."  

Mind you, as you say, you are welcome to do (b) but just don't keep saying that is what people should do.  Studies show that we all like accurate sound when only the ear is involved.

@kota1 

@amir_asr , OK, thanks for sharing. The last time I did the test you just posted was when I auditioned a Mapleshade Digital Interconnect I had for a 30 day trial (about $250). After about 100 hrs of break in I "blind tested" it with my current cable and it was MUCH better so I kept it.

Well you made a big mistake.  If I predict the outcome of a coin flip, do you think I can do that forever?  It could be pure luck, right?  What if I did that twice in a row?  Still could be luck.  How about 4 times?  Yes, it could still be luck.  Indeed I have run blind tests where I got it right 4 or 5 times only to completely fail after that.

If you go back to the start of the video I linked to, I explain the above.  And how claims of "I ran a blind test" mean nothing unless they are repeated and backed by that statistical analysis to reduce the chances of pure luck.  For this reason I keep saying run a test 10 times and see if 8 out of that many tests you can identify the cable. 

If a cable is "MUCH" better, you should be able to tell it apart 20 times and still get it right.  So fire up your camera, start shooting a video of how many times in a row you can tell that cable from another.  Then we have something to talk about.  Until then, the only thing you demonstrated is that you still don't know how to properly get to audio truth.

Also, nothing about your anecdote validates the requirement for 100 hours of break in.  You need to go and get a fresh cable and compare it to the 100 hour broken one and see if you can get at least 8 out of 10 times right.  You say the company gives you 30 days free trial.  So when can be expect this result?

Until then, your starting claim in ASR that Audioquest cable needed 100 hours of break in before testing is just nonsense.  Heck, that cable is even different than yours so how can you claim both need the same 100 hours???

@kota1 

Are you here to throw more spitballs again? The guy that measures doesn't have any measurements about his own system? Embarrassing. If you are experiencing "technical difficulties" please post what they are and I am sure I can help, NP.

Thank you for the offer. But before you volunteer time to help me, see if you can help yourself in your audio beliefs.  Per above, I am still trying to figure out why you claim 100 hours of break is mandatory for a cable.  Or answering OP's question of why cable measurements are not provided as I do every time I review one on ASR.

Remember, earlier you claimed I had never run double blind tests and I showed you I had run many.  I suggest checking your knowledge of me before shooting from the hip again. 

Let me also add that if you want measurements for a cable, I am happy to do that.  While I am getting a bit exhausted from testing so many and finding none modify the output of the audio system, I am still here if you want to have that data.  Cables are small and light to ship so not much burden.  And I usually pay for return shipping so you are only out of pocket for the expense of sending it me.

If you were never interested in such measurements but created a topic asking for it anyway, then say so and we go about our business instead of dealing with a Kabuki theater.

@thyname 

@kota1 : let’s be fair here, Sir Armir’s AP testing equipment alone is several times more expensive than your entire system. Everything sounds fabulous through it. Who listens to music nowadays. So 20th century. You measure. And enjoy the signal. Those graphs give you goosebumps 🤭 (I wanted to say “a hard on “ but I refrained)

Who listens to music these days?  Apparently not folks here who are having anxiety if their power cables are letting in enough air.  Or whether their systems are broken in. Rest of us enjoy our systems without such worries. 

As to graphs, the only person demanding graphs right now BTW is @kota1.  And OP made an attempt to get some for his cables but seems he didn't really want that either.

As to my system, it sounds great because that is what my ears tell me.  What business of yours to challenge my ears?  The main thing it is missing right now is air.  Lots of air.  As soon as one of you can convince me that one of your tweaks takes care of that business, that will be remedied as well.

@kota1 

@amir_asr I’m demanding graphs AND posting graphs, so where are yours?

I have not seen a single measurement from you regarding topic of this thread: cables.  As for me, you didn't ask me or I would be happy to post a ton:

Here is the Nordost Tyr 2 Coax cable: 

And comparison to generic cable:

 Belden Iconoclast cable: 

And null test with music:

Actual recordings are there in the review thread if you want to take a listen and see if you can tell the difference.

You can see a lot more reviews/measurements here: 

Audio Cable Reviews

You have anything like this?  If not, why not?  How can you demand measurements when you don't care about such measurements?

@juanmanuelfangioii 

@holmz it was a reference to Revel not Vandys. 

Harman (Revel/JBL) engineering loves to release the detailed measurements but their marketing department thinks that will be too confusing for customers to understand.  Fortunately the engineering team has leaked a boatload of them and someone online has organized them for you (NOT me):

@kota1

I told you, I already posted the specs of my cables earlier in this thread.

Specs or measurements?  I went back to page 1 and you said this:

@fleschler , if I had budget I would use Mapleshade XLR's throughout the whole system but with roughly 11 active speakers and long runs for height channels and surrounds, not gonna happen.

You have measurements for this Mapleshade cable?  How about for these claims they make on their home page:

• Lift all speaker, power, and interconnect wires 8" off any carpet or plastic tile. Use string, wood, cardboard, or 20 ounce Styrofoam cups for temporary props. You’ll think you’ve pulled horse blankets off your speakers. For a more civilized-looking solution

You have done this and have before and after measurements of your system?

How about this:

NEVER use speaker cables shorter than 8'. Amazingly, 4' sounds much worse than 8'. Contrary to common belief, shorter interconnects (2 m or less) and longer speaker cables always sound WAY BETTER than the opposite—based on extensive head-to-head tests.

You have measurements to back this? 

To improve high end cables, remove any outer nylon mesh: the bad dielectric only adds grunge. Remove any metal barrels on RCA plugs—you lose the locking feature and gain transparency.

Anyone done this here and has measurements to back before and after results?

Then there is this:

Any cable with a molded-in ferrite (the small plastic-covered cylinder at one or both ends) sounds way better with the ferrite removed. 

This is your favorite cable, right?  Where are the measurements to back your choice of this cable? 

Let's get this cable topic settled and them I am happy to discuss your room measurements.  Until then it sure looks like you want to change the topic.

@holmz 

… so there is at least one that takes some pride in the measurements.

Sadly those measurements are gated/in-room and as such, have no low frequency resolution to speak of.  Notice how the X axis starts at 700 Hz.  Things like cabinet/port resonances are just not seen with that kind of measurement  I am also pretty sure the response above that region is also smoothed and is not raw.  For a company their size, they should get proper anechoic measurements for their speakers.

@kota1 

@amir_asr , you are spit balling again, nice try on another bait and switch.

Look above this post.  Keep going.  All the way to the top where you see the OP thread starter.  It is specifically about cables and measurements for them.  There is not a word about my system, room measurements, etc.  So the only bait and switch is yours.

Regardless, I said that I will engage you with your topic as long as we are done with this discussion about cables and measurements.  Please confirm that you do not have any measurements for the cables you are promoting.  And that you have no interest in finding measurements for them.  That your claim of "blind" testing was without value. 

Once we conclude this thread then we can engage in the one you are dying to change the topic to.

@kota1 

or

I see you post Mike Lavigne's system.  I have listened to it on two occasions.  Have you?  Do you know that if you ask him for measurements of his room or his system he will throw you out the room?  I suggest not referencing him if you want to go down the path of measurements of anything related to audio.

There is no dishonour in gated measurements… I think even Klipple uses gated measurements.

That is true but not in the manner you are thinking.  Gated measurements are used in Klippel for higher frequencies (usually above 1 kHz -- it is a  user setting).  Lower are generated using field separation giving you very high resolution down to 20 Hz (or even lower) -- something any reasonable sized anechoic chamber can't do.

@millercarbon 

In short, it is hard to think of anything more disastrously credibility destroying than to criticize Mike's room, or hospitality. 

You are completely out of line with that comment.  Mike's hospitality was very much appreciated and not remotely questioned.  Please don't create fights with such falsehoods.  

As to your observations of sitting in corner and such, I am not aware of your listening skills.  I do know that my experience in non-optimal location was not good.  Here is my extensive write-up of one of my visits to his room: 

"I initially sat on the second room to the left. That is behind the sweet listening chair visible in the above picture.

I must say that experience was pretty disappointing. The sound was dull and uninteresting. Try as I might, I could not get excited or understand why people come back with superlatives to describe the sound in Mike's room. There was little soundstage, highs were muffled, bass rather dry but not blended in well, etc. On scale 1 to 10, I would give it 4.

We were taking turns to sit in the rolling center chair. I got my chance after 15 minutes or so and boy did that transform the experience. There was a precise depth to the soundstage with pretty high isolation of instruments. Highs came back to life and bass become very supportive. I did not want to hog the chair too long and gave it up to others."

Anyway, none of his has anything to do with my post.  I was merely mentioning that in a thread dedicated to measurements and fellow demanding room measurements, you don't go and post about Mike system.  And any comment about his sound relative to mine without listening or measurements, says you have substituted your eyes for your ears.

@jerryg123 

I also will bet that Mikes room sounds 10,000 times better than yours!

So you don't need your ears to determine this?  Just your eyes?

@juanmanuelfangioii 

@amir_asr was adressing @holmz post and really could care less about Revel. I am a QLN guy and that is that. I also do not go to your site or care much for the opinions posted there, by you or your membership.

That's cool.  I post a respond to you because you specifically commented that measurements for Revel speakers were missing.  I post a link to a third-party site with said information, not mine so don't know why you are complaining.  When I post something, it is for everyone to read anyway, and not just you.

"Do not make out like only Harmon and JBL have a chamber, That could be perceived as being a shill to your old people. "

I am not a shill for any company.  Companies don't need anechoic chambers.  They can simply rent space in one or get Klippel to measure it for them.  The cost is less than $2,000 for a speaker.  If a company can't afford to do this, or can't be bothered, it is not going to get my support.  It is one thing for a DIY to not afford such fees, it is entirely different matter for a major company.

Note also that we are not not just looking for a few simple measurements.  We want full CEA-2034 plus distortion measurements.  A few gated measurements are not going to do it.

@axo1989 

I imagine canine Majidimehr is a more capable student than human Majidimehr. 

I read him your post and this was his reaction: