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.
@richopp +1 "Measurements are nice, but, as Duane asked, "How (does) it SOUND?”" I’ve seen many very expensive installations, sounding so-so, despite perfect measurements of some components in it. “Measurement” is focused on single component, and it is done using ideal source + loading, which “improves” component performance significantly over real life scenario. |
@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"They make very rudimentary measurements often using obsolete audio analyzers” Dear, your APx555 with -117dB NF is outdated to measure my -124dB NF DAC :-), not talking here about RFI/EMI noise polluted environment.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! |
@amir_asr "their performance shot up through the roof” because “xyz" roof is too low? |
@fleschler you have good point! I know some important performance metrics are not disclosed because companies are too greedy, competition, standards are not consistent or detailed, third party test LABs are getting the best - tuned samples, for qualification and publicity. |
@fleschler thanks for your “story”, your “sales" skills are outstanding! on other hand I am still not getting answer on my question, what manufacturer’s measurement of original cable is missing, and what measurement “improved” cable exceeds on?
|
@fleschler please help me to understand what are you trying to say! is it about cables not measured / disclosed / faulty? Topic: "Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?" Post: "My neighbor and friend was ashamed of his system when I lent him ONE power cable for his amp."
|
@fleschler thanks for reply! I see as on you are measuring cables by price, not electrical performance, and priciest cable does sound better. |
@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. 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. audio system to check should include actual components, interconnects, components match, and room acoustics. |
@fleschler thanks for reply (again)! I still don’t see measurable performance metric you are looking for at manufacturer’s data, to name a few: loop resistance, loop inductance, EM shielding, flexibility, EOL, etc. in your reply I see price as only differentiator, even for the same manufacturer. "A $35 Chinese made cable is going to cut corners no matter how one looks at it.” - what electrical spec is compromised? |
@holmz +1 - time domain response has significant SQ impact.it also has to include small signal steps, scaling to max power level to check dynamics. |
@holmz yes, impulse response is sensitive to amplitude. |
@kota1 - thanks for posting cable study paper link! that “ paper “ captures most of important IC parameters for passive circuits. unfortunately, audio system is more complex than that, and has sources and receivers built of active circuits. active circuits can add “audible” ringing to the signal, if cable parameters push circuit phase margin below targeted value. EMI/RF noise also can be audible, because not all sensitive amplifiers have enough high frequency noise rejection, to withstand modern days RF noise in our living spaces. depending on modulation technique, RF noise can be heard as additional “unexplained" noise affecting SQ. phono-pre could be a good example of sensitive active circuit usage, and therefore it is very hard to find good match between cartridge, cable, and phono-pre, to achieve excellent SQ. |
@holmz RF EM noise in the house can be detected with RF analyzer |
@millercarbon +100 "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" - manufacturing of components includes key measurements to make sure parameters are within commit spec. |
@mapman +100 "Wow this Amir guy really knows how to ruffle some feathers in these parts. Maybe he’d be better off just offering up opinions like most everyone else." |
