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


After my Audio Science Review review forum, it became apparent that nearly the only way one can determine the measurements of an audio product is wait for a review on line or in a publication.  Most equipment is never reviewed or is given a subjective analysis rather than a measurement oriented review.  One would think that manufacturers used tests and measurements to design and construct their products. 

Manufacturers routinely give the performance characteristics of their products as Specifications.  Those are not test measurements.

I searched the Revel speaker site for measurements of any of their speakers and could not find any.  Revels are universally lauded for their exceptional reviewed measurements.  Lack of published manufacturer measurements is true for nearly every speaker manufacturer I've searched for on line, perhaps several hundred.   Same is true for amps, pre-amps, DACs, transports, turntables, well you get the picture.  Do they have something to hide?   I doubt the good quality products have anything to hide but poor quality products do.  

ASR prides itself in providing "true" measurements that will aid in purchase decisions.   Why don't the manufacturers provide these measurements so that reviewers can test if they are truthful or not?

Then there are the cables and tweaks for which I suspect that there are inadequate tests available to measure sonically perceived differences but which objectivists believe don't exist or are "snake oil."  

Well, please chime in if you have some illuminating thoughts on the subject.   

I would have loved to see manufacturers measurements on my equipment and especially those that I rejected.  

fleschler

Showing 5 responses by millercarbon

I've been to Mikes three times, including one solo visit. Mike's room is so good my first time I sensed it just walking in the door. Then walking around taking it all in the sights and the sounds this sense of acoustic bliss grew and grew. At one point during the first visit with someone else in the sweet spot I took the opportunity to stroll around checking out the sound from lots of different places. Growing more and more impressed, finally I went right into a corner. Try this some time. Very hard to not have boomy bass in a corner. Nothing. Nada.

Looking around it was apparent even before Mike explained anything that he had some false walls and storage hiding bass traps. The openings were nicely covered in fabric making them appear as if they are not there at all.

If the traps are hidden the diffusers and absorption panels are not. The whole room was professionally designed, and then refined and perfected by Mike making countless improvements over the years. The result is the most perfect acoustic space I have ever heard. 

Just outside Mike's listening room is a very nicely stocked wet bar. This is where I discovered the most delicious whiskey of all time, Angel's Envy Finished Rye. About the only thing more delicious than that is when Mike put his dubbed master tape of Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here on the Studer.

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

Yes, I am aware of that hopelessly lost, muddled, and illogical view. Hopeless, because they won't listen. Lost, because it forgets the reason for music in the first place is enjoyment. Muddled, because it pretends to serve as a guide and frame of reference, when in fact it removes them all. Or let them prove otherwise, simply tell us what measurements and in what order and proportion they can be used to rank performance. Illogical, because they pretend to be mind readers. After all, how else would THEY know YOU wasted YOUR money? 

Nonsense on stilts, a smorgasbord of it, from soup to nuts.

A comment, or clarification: measurements are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. 

When building something it can be very useful to measure certain parameters, in order to quantify progress in design changes, especially changes that might be below the threshold of audibility. Or it might also be useful to measure in order to discern what quantitative measures correlate with listener preference. Keith Herron for example once told me he believed people were sensitive to as little as 1/4dB in a certain circuit. This is far too low a level for anyone to identify as being louder or pick that out as the reason, they simply preferred one over another and only Keith knew the reason.

The takeaway, what I got from it anyway, was three-fold:

First, his testing was double-blind. So there is a use case even for this so often abused method.

Second, measurements can be essential. It was only by rigorously measuring output that he knew what it was his test subjects were hearing, or more precisely choosing between.

And third and most crucially, the end goal was listener preference. Not the measurement. The experience. 

Say again, measurements are a means to an end. If you can keep this simple fact in mind any time you see anyone putting the cart before the horse, it can save you a whole lot of misery, wasted time, and money.

And now, at the risk of beating a now hopefully dead horse, I was not looking for a way of measuring cable vibrations to prove Cable Cradles work. Simply listen, it is obvious. I was looking for something that might help me figure out how to make them even better. There is always better. The proof is in the hearing. That is all.

Townshend has a couple videos that use a iPad running a seismic app that displays vibrations very well. This works great for speakers, but the iPad is too heavy for testing smaller isolation gear. I tried an iPhone app, even the iPhone is way too heavy. If anyone knows an affordable motion detector that is very light weight (ounce or two at most) please let me know, I would love to test the Cable Cradles.