Thanks for your kind words...

I know they cannot understand because they are in a cult or brainwashed. They dont want to read and study and debate about the articles i put here..

They dont want to understand, some defend their site ideology and they sell their services doing so then they had no interest to look farther than their ideology ...

But ad hominem arguments are useless it is why we must used articles of research and their conclusion to make a point ...

i posted my articles to help those who may be interested in astounding facts about acoustics ...If i can help one person this will be useful.

i did not posted all i could it will be too long...😊

 

By the way i want to be clear... For me ASR is useful site...It is the ideology behind their measurements which is simplistic...

I thank Amir for his measures verification but the ideology is useless and childish...

Double blind test is a circus, everybody had biases, trained positive one and negative one so what? Placebo effect as invoked by ASR people is ridiculous to debunk the claim of trained acoustician as the claim of an ignorant audiophile... Etc ...

I am not against double blind test they are regularly used in acoustics experiments...but when used to debunk what someone say in regular life it is contemptuous and come from an ideology not from acoustic science specific research in specific context...

 

@mahgister My friend. Why are you still arguing with people who clearly don’t want to share your opinions? I’m sure you’ve jeard that insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Do yourself a favor and let it go. Listen to some music. Cheers.

Then prof why in front of everybody here using an argument as : "I dont want to follow you down the rabbit hole"

And refusing to discuss sound perception, hearing theory, and what we can perceive as human ?

The absence of answer from you and the qualification of my posts by the expression "rabbit hole" is ad hominem argument...

It does not seems that it matter for you to appear as an ideologue ...

Because repeating Amir mantra is ideology not science ..

the science is these articles and the book i just presented with this last one i present again because it is very important one :

Human hearing beats the Fourier uncertainty principle

https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html

 

Prove me you are able to read a 2 pages scientific article and answer my question : why the human hearing is able to beat the Fourier uncertainty, explain me why, and i will conclude that you are able to  read a simple scientific  article...

 

It seems the "rabbit hole" where you disapear suddenly is your techno-cultist simplistic ideology about hearing ...😊

 

But wait a minute is Akpan J. essien right about sound ?

Yes he is...

This article confirm completely his book thesis which i had by the way ...

Human perceive sound source with their body and as meaningful because they are able to detect QUALIA related to the sound source state ...

Then prof read that :

Pythagoras was wrong: There are no universal musical harmonies, study finds

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-pythagoras-wrong-universal-musical-harmonies.html

 

Prof when 2 person discuss together one argument must be opposed by another arguments..

Then one must ground his argument in science facts ( research acoustic papers) not mantras about the debunking of cables with measuring tools..

No thinking about acoustic perception can be done if we dont define the acoustic context  and what is hearing...

Buying an electrical tool from Walmart is not an argument ... 😊

Now another article to educate ...and those who want to understand:

 

 

The Body-Image Theory of Sound: An Ecological Approach to Speech and Music

this article is free to read here :

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267327268_The_Body-Image_Theory_of_Sound_An_Ecological_Approach_to_Speech_and_Music

Abstract
The definition of sound in physics as vibrations in an elastic medium establishes a link between the sound source and the organism. Thus, it satisfies an essential psychophysical prerequisite for a theory of perception. However,
over the past 170 years since Ohm’s law (1843), and some 137 years since Helmholtz’s resonance theory (1877),psychoacoustic procedures founded on air vibration have shrouded music and speech in mystery. Ecological
theories have fallen short, not only of Gestalt invariance, but also of the link between the distal object and the organism. This paper approaches auditory analysis from the standpoint of sound production. It argues that
although air vibration produces sound, sound is not air vibration; and that exploitation of features of air vibration can hardly (if ever) lead to accurate understanding of the principle of the auditory mechanism in speech or music
perception. Evidence is provided in support of the definition of sound as the vibratory image of the sonorous body. It establishes isomorphism between characteristics of a sonorous body and auditory attributes of sound.
Wherefore, a body is different from the sound it produces in much the same way as steam is different from ice ─ two different forms of the same entity. The data under consideration offer succinct insights into the way the
auditory mechanism extracts from sound wave invariants for use in speech or music regardless of chaotic production and acoustic variability. Implications for future research in speech, music and all aspects of auditory analysis are discussed

 

I wrote about a specific cable to illustrate how measurements can speak to how something "sounds." Please read more carefully.

And yourself when you quoted me have you understand what i had written?

this is what i said, «For sure we can tell by measurements that certain sonic claims MAY BE false ( not are always false as you wrote) this does not means that all audible characteristics of sounds perceived meanings are measurable by few electrical tool ...» Do you get it ?

 

 

i did not contradict the usefulness of measure, i discarded your claim about their dogmatic use in all case as meaning that what is audible is always measured or measurable..

You accuse me of what you did : you misread my answer...😊

And sorry, beyond that I’m not too inclined to follow you down your rabbit holes. Been there, done that.

You are not ashamed to describe as "rabbit hole" my arguments which are grounded in many acoustics research papers and a book you had not even read ?

You think repeating mantra as biases, double blind test, measures of electrical specs of gear, etc is enough to hide your ignorance about acoustics experience ?

People who actually understand measurements can tell quite a bit about how a product will sound.  The fact you can't doesn't change that.

 

You dont understand that a piece of gear with good specs does not  means that this piece will worl the same coupled to other pieces of gear and in different room...

This is why claiming that we can judge completely the sound quality of a piece of gear ONLY  with few electrical measures to verify his design on some aspects (not all of them ) is non sense or marketing publicity for an ideology or for a site who need badly some specific way to describe audio experience and reduce it to electrical design ...

A spec of light here :

This is where Amir is so completely wrong. We do not know how to measure the things in the audio chain which some of our ears perceive as the most vital in reproduction.

It is simple read a book about acoustics you will discover some or like me tune your own room .. 😊

Then if you do that you will discover the power of your own techno-cultism bias ...😉

This is what many audiophiles just seem to be utterly ignorant about: the power of bias.

So...by measurements you can tell certain sonic claims are false, and also that if you replace a cheap cable with the Nordost cable, it won't have any sonic consequences.  You can know it will SOUND the same...from the measurements.

Prof are you a sophist?

For sure we can tell by measurements that certain sonic claims MAY BE  false ( not are always false as you wrote) this does not means that all audible characteristics of sounds perceived meanings are measurable by few electrical tool ...

Are you unable to read the two0 scientific article i just put here?

I had three other one to close the door behind your techno cultist electrical  tool  sophism put as science in replacement of acoustics ...

 Are you unable to read scientific article?

 

I base my decisions for audio gear only by how they connect me to the music emotionally. I realize this is just flowery nonsense for tech-heads. I don’t care how a product measures as long as it connects me to the music. I envy a person who sits in a car, listening to what many may consider a substandard car stereo but is enjoying the heck out of the song. The car stereo is connecting the listener to the emotion of the music. It’s that emotional connection I want. I could care less about measurements. Let qualified engineers do that. I am NOT qualified nor do I pretend to be. Amir is just black&white on audio. He doesn’t have or express any emotion to connect himself to any music. He reminds me of a robot or AI who has zero emotional connection to gear. He probably has a serious case of alexithymia.

 

When you say that what matter is your own connection on an emotional level to music, an ASR member or Amir can then criticize your subjective listening experience as pure deluded subjective arbitrary sensations...

They do it regularly...

They dont understand acoustics at all ...😁

They promote a techno-cultic ideology centered around few tools for verifying a small set of specs.. Thats all... It is useful but thats all ...

Their ideology though is meaningless ...

They then will dismiss your emotional Bodily sensations as hallucinations, placebo effects, and at the end completely meaningless..

They can do this because they are stupendously ignorant about hearing theory and specifically ecological hearing theory...

If they had read philosophy of science and psychology the name J. J. Gibson will ring a bell in their head...😁

 

 

Now read this FREE article a very serious study in acoustics science demonstrating the universal meaning in the human emotional body of music...

«Our main finding was that the topographies of music-induced
bodily sensations vary according to the emotional and structural
features of music while being consistent across participants and musical exemplars from Western and East Asian cultures. We
observed close correspondence between music-induced subjective
emotions and bodily sensations, suggesting that bodily responses
might be a key pathway in the elicitation and differentiation of
music-induced emotions (27). Given the cultural consistency of
these effects, the results suggest similar embodiment of musical
emotions across distant cultures and point toward a biological
component in music- induced bodily sensations.»

«We conclude that music induces consistent bodily sensations and
emotions across the studied Western and East Asian cultures.
These subjective feelings were similarly associated with acoustic
and structural features of music in both cultures. These results
demonstrate similar embodiment of music-induced emotions in
geographically distant cultures and suggest that music-induced
emotions transcend cultural boundaries due to cross-culturally
shared emotional connotations of specific musical cues. We argue
that bodily experience, which may arise from skeletomuscular
activity and changes in the physiological state of the body, plays a critical role in the elicitation and differentiation of music-induced emotions.»

 

 

«Emotions, bodily sensations and movement are integral parts of musical experiences. Yet,it remains unknown i) whether emotional connotations and structural features of music elicit discrete bodily sensations and ii) whether these sensations are culturally consistent.We addressed these questions in a cross- cultural study with Western (European andNorth American, n = 903) and East Asian (Chinese, n = 1035). We precented participants with silhouettes of human bodies and asked them to indicate the bodily regions whose activity they felt changing while listening to Western and Asian musical pieces with varying emotional and acoustic qualities. The resulting bodily sensation maps
(BSMs) varied as a function of the emotional qualities of the songs, particularly in the limb, chest, and head regions. Music-induced emotions and corresponding BSMs were replicable across Western and East Asian subjects. The BSMs clustered similarly across cultures, and cluster structures were similar for BSMs and self-reports of emotional experience. The acoustic and structural features of music were consistently associated with the emotion ratings and music-induced bodily sensations across cultures. These results highlight the importance of subjective bodily experience in music-induced emotions and demonstrate consistent associations between musical features, music-induced
emotions, and bodily sensations across distant cultures.»

Bodily maps of musical sensations across cultures

 

@mahgister

Behind the ’apparently scientific’ facade some of these guys are posing under, it is largely a utilitarian life for these ASR types (eat, plug cables into audio precision kit, garbage in/garbage out, look at graph, go to sleep, think about Sean Olive for more street cred, etc). Don’t waste your breath trying to talk about anything that flows into the "metaphysical" realms with this utilitarian crew... 😁

 

 

I only spoke about science, acoustics science with them...

And they dont understand acoustics at all ...

many ASR people act as someone who sees nails everywhere because they own a hammer...

ASR sell this little set of measures as the ONLY solution to qualitative audio experience...

This techno-cultism has then anything to do about science...it is an ideology...They are not even conscious that we need an hearing theory background to define concepts...

For example what is "timbre" and what are we perceiving when we perceive a "timbre"... The subject is so complex i discovered only one book , a doctorate thesis, about this phenomenon... And i read this book and used it when i argued with another engineer here 3 or 4 years ago...

In an extraordinary set of events i just read two scientific papers few weeks ago that confirmed the ecological theory of hearing i begun to understand reading this book ... It is an acoustic revolution ...

i spoke about that in the thread "sound as a mystical experience" ...It is pure acoustics i spoke about not mystics experience even if sound has healing and spiritual effect...

I never dare to speak "metaphysics" as you said with them, if they dont understand what timbre is and the acoustics primacy in audio how will you begin to understand metaphysics ?

Prof once said to me that the astrology Kepler and Newton studied all their life is bogus matter for deluded people... I asked him what studies he has done of astrology ... he answered none... I myself bought near 100 books and studied Indian as western astrology as a hobby and i know what is meaningful and what is meaningless in astrology ...

I did the same in linguistic...I read my first linguistic book 40 years ago ( a doctorate thesis about the greatest linguist since Panini a french , Gustave Guillaume)

I did the same in mathematics... ( i studied Logic and Set theory and number theory )

As for acoustics...( i wanted to set my system/ room, it takes me 2 years full time and some narrow mind dare to claim that i need a double blind test with ABX , this is comical because when you tune a room you use simple blind test all the time, it is a tool not an ideological circus )

Now i did the same for economy... ( the root of the market idea is not from Adam Smith nor the classes concept from Marx )

Most people think for example that Capitalism and Marxism are economic theory... They are not... They are techno cultist specific way to allocate products and services in an open centralized way (Marxism) or in relation to market price and money supply control ( hidden centralization controls as with Blackrock nowadays) ... Capitalism and Marxism are ideology not economical science ... As Nazism theory of race is a techno cultist ideology not biological science.... Those who think that these 2 techno cultists ideologies are part and center of the real economy which is an ethical science are like our friend for which owning a hammer means that all is nails...

By the way i learned about the originator of the market idea , Bernard Mandeville from an Hayek conference 70 years ago where he called Mandeville genius "our master to us all" Guess why ? He knows a bit about economy with 8 Nobel prize among his disciples...

 

 

Ok i spoke too much ...

 

Thanks for your kind word ...

 

 

😊

 

By the way "distortion" is not just a defect... ( measured in THD ) 😁

It may be a quality...

Some musician use it for expression and poetic diction too ...

Then distortion as in speech transmission index (STI) which predicts speech intelligibility based on reverberation, background noise, and signal distortion refer to many things not one . Then distortion means a lot of things...

But mainly distortion is not only and merely a negative impediment or a deformation of an electric signals it is also an acoustic phenomenon related among other factors to the reverberation time in a room ..It can be also an added musical effect....

In my experience above, the right balance between quartz and shungite on the cables increase the auditory perception of the signals as, if i may borrow a metaphor, like a more thicker and refined line in a drawing improve the visual (acoustic) meanings perception ...

Here too in my definition of distortion, which is more than just the signals/noise ratio, it is about a  POSITIVE qualia, a physical invariant linked to speech detection or to musicality ...A surplus of information that cannot be always disqualified as an impediment...

I am a bit far from ASR ideology here ...😊

Science is complex, techno cultism is simplistic... It is a faith based on the idolatry of tools instead of the wholeness of the phenomenon which include the subjective perception not just as a mere impediment but also as a trustful interpreter because there is always two sides on the acoustic coin...

 

Some are not here to exhange about audio experience. But they are here to sell gear or worst their own ideology...

They cannot be convinced , they dont think , they used their tools. Period. 😊

 

The perception of timbre is not a deluded perception of some subjective coloration or the extraction of a ratio from a pure Fourier map... It is the recognition of a physical set of invariants in the vibrating sound source or affecting it ... ( Pythagorean purely mathematical description of acoustic information as ratio is debunked by late science and the new ecological theory of acoustic)

A qualia it is was we detected...Something Galilee exclude from science 5 centuries ago because it is not easily reducible to the primary qualities..But science progress.. 😊

 

For the simplest example of a perceived physical invariant from the vibrating sound source : you tap a fruit to inform yourself if this vibrating source will communicate to you one of these two information by some physical invariant : is the fruit ripe or not ...

 

Then now suppose in an experiment where i put quartz piece on a cable...

And suppose that i put a shungite piece after on this cable in a second experiment ...

Is it possible that my Ears/brain could detect something affecting one of the vibrating sound source (the cables with or without the minerals on it ) ? 😋

 

As you can see i can propose one of the hundred of experiments i devised for myself ...

I can predict that the shungite will compress the sound and the quartz will not... 😊

Is it measurable? Probably but not by Amir tools...With your ears you could do it ...

 

 

@mahgister   You miss the point. Everything you wrote is moot unless it is the case, for any example, that we really are able to detect a sonic difference. The most reliable method of doing this is listening tests controlling for biases. And we have learned a lot about thresholds in human hearing. There are measurable levels of differences and distortions that you will not detect, just as you will not detect with your senses X-rays. @terry9 See above. In scientific terms you are putting the cart before the horse: assuming your sighted impressions to have delivered The Truth, and then inferring from that, well if it’s not showing up in measurements then it’s the measurements that are inaccurate or incomplete...rather than the possibility it is your perception that is inaccurate.

You are so enthralled with your techno-cultist ideology that you dont even see my point...

Sounds are acoustics meanings not bits. ( the set of bits only CONVEY acoustics meanings from a recording room to another listening room)

The ears-brain is tuned to recognize concrete acoustics meanings..In speech and in my room listening music..

The numbers of factors implied is huge... You cannot predict with few electrical measurements what i will hear...

You then call what i will hear "illusions" forgetting that the acoustics meanings perceived vary much with the training...

You can fool someone blind about a bit of sound taken out of his usual acoustic environment and calling all human perceptions delusion if something is not measured BEFORE and AFTER...

 

 

But here it is you who put the sophism and put the cart before the horse... In acoustics we trust hearing and measure it to refine hearing aids for example. To do so we need to trust that musicians for example are able to detect really a piece of information that Fourier uncertainty principle will deem impossible to perceive...

( This trust is born not from a debunking circus of ASR but from real statistical studies to probe the limits of hearing and acousticians were astounded by our own ability)

Then instead of suspecting any individual to be deluded, acousticians discovered the opposite of your ideological watchword guru selling point about ASR ideology : namely human hearing has his own non linear way to extract meaningful acoustic information in his own time domain ... Have you even read the article above ? it is not about astrology or ASR ideology and cultist tool debunking, by the way , but about pure science ...

You are in a techno-cultist religion it seems... I prefer science... 😊

You make me smile because i remember you can have opinion about what you had never studied (astrology) ...

To resume my acoustics opinion: i am not a subjectivist because i believe in acoustic training and measurements and i am not an objectivist because accusing people of being deluded if they dont put all their faith in few electrical measures, is not my business as ASR Amir... ( i dont do business i set my room😁 )

«I am always between you brothers because science exist between fields too »-- Groucho Marx  christian epistemology 🤓

Thanks

Amir actually believes that all things coming out of your stereo can be measured and even subtle differences will show up in testing.

Why wouldn’t that be the case?

Remember why we usually create tools, especially measuring tools? Because of the limitations of our own senses! That’s why we build telescopes to see things we can’t with our naked eye, microscopes because our vision is limited in acuity, and we have all manner of instruments that can detect differences we ourselves can not. That goes for measuring audio gear with devices that can detect "subtle changes" in the signal that our ears can not detect. And we know enough about human hearing to look at measurements of amps, or speakers, and note which ACTUAL sonic phenomenon our ears are sensitive to or not.

All this suggests that of course measurements are a good tool for detecting "subtle differences."

 

You are so wrong here ... ( i dont deny the informative value of measurements here but the ideology and ignorance that is implied by what you claimed dogmatically)

But i had already a discussion for 7 days here with Amir and he did not understood anything...😁 And i used physicists and acoustician articles...

 

In a nutshell hearing theories actually pointed toward ecological theory of perception...

Why ?

Because bits are not meanings for a consciousness... And perceived sound experience is not identical with a Fourier map in the Fourier linear time domain.. The ears/brain create his own meanings in his own non linear time domain...

Read about acoustics and replace your electrical techno-cultism tool fetichism with real science ...

read at least this article :

https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html#:~:text=%28Phys.org%29%E2%80%94For%20the%20first%20time%2C%20physicists%20have%20found%20that,the%20limit%20imposed%20by%20the%20Fourier%20uncertainty%20principle.

 

There is actually a revolution in acoustics science ..

Go to the thread of Bolong "sound is a mystic experience " where i posted in the last few pages all articles describing this acoustic revolution and his meanings ...

😊

No one commented anything there save two idiots trolling me ...

Am i the only one interested by real science ?

Most confuse tools user manual with science ...it is the actual new techno cultic religion...promoted by corporate powers over Nations... Read about Blackrock total control of money flows by the way and you will understand why Trudeau and Biden or Trump are toys in higher hands ...

Myself contrary to subjectivist or objectivist sellers of gear i invite people to read science and experiment ... 😎

 

By the way it is evident that it is impossible to take into account  all variables parameters at play in the system/room/ears-brain-body experience of sound , they are electrical (electrical grid noise floor  of the house system room etc) Mechanical (resonances vibrations) acoustical and psychoacoustical... Then to analyse the S.Q. of a piece of gear few electrical measurements are not enough at all ...

The ideological claim that a few measures of a certain types are enough is only that : a seller ideology... Amir sell something ...

Science is way more complex...

Good posts for me prefab

Thanks and welcome...

And about Amir, i must add that to evaluate really a piece of gear we must do it also by listening for sure but listening in the same acoustic under control  conditions and with the same other pieces of gear  we already know for a long time  because precisely "Golden ears" dont exist save as an insult by ignorant ..

If not  evaluated in perfectly well known acoustic conditions, how do you for the first time evaluate a piece of gear in unknown acoustic environment resulting from other pieces of gear you do know know much either ?... The music/sound  must be evaluated with a dedicated acoustic room, a system we know and a music we know...

Measures are welcome, ideology not so welcome...

What is this electromechanical and "acoustical" synthesis/optimization you have done that no one else has been able to do (seemingly)? Can you list the tangible/physical things you did (stuff that went further than the theorycrafting domain)?...I sincerely hope it doesn’t involve a healthy dose of listener self-hypnosis as well! 😬

 

 

As i said in many posts here for 8 years, i experimented...

I described in details my own way to couple/decouple vibrations and decrease resonance in my speakers...It is not transferable for all speakers in all living room ( i had my dedicated room ) but this taught me a lot about mechanical controls of the speakers. The impact of negative resonance and vibrations is staggering and unsuspected by most speakers owners...

I will not describe anew here in a longer post what i described elsewhere...😊

Save if you want the details...

I did the same for electrical noise floor control in my own way.... It is well known that the house/room electrical noise floor level must be under control ...i created my own "tweaks " too (with shungite and copper and quartz) i dont buy anything that cost more than a peanuts butter pot...

i did the same with my two dedicated room... I know basic acoustics by experiments not by buying panels... 😁

In my first room i used a grid of 100 Helmholtz resonators for example mechanically tuned by ears in specific location to modify the pressure zones distribution... The location around listening position and around speaker A and speaker B was important...

i did many others things... But i cannot repeat all this in details here...Some will kill me for the post lenght...And some narrow mind will mock my use of other devices...

 

What i learned is that any relatively low cost system from 1,000 to 20,000 bucks with a minimal synergy quality, then well chosen, when they are embedded in these three working dimensions, mechanical,electrical and acoustical, they can gave their peak optimal working and reach their maximum working point.

This is enough to reach what i called : audiophile minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold...

Any costlier system if it is not well embedded in these three dimensions will be less interesting at worst or at best will be rivalled in S.Q. by a less refined design or less costly one...

Acoustics basic, mechanical and electrical basic knowledge rules audio , not price tags of the gear...

Creativity matter more than money...

And know that acoustics definitions and parameters controls had nothing to do with placebo and self hypnosis...

Timbre is defined by 5 factors at least , modify one in one direction or in the inverse direction and the timbre will change... No placebo here, it is acoustics principles at work... If you modify the reverberation time of your room by modifying the balance between absorption and reflection on some plane you will perceive a change in the experience... If you act in reverse you will perceive another change etc... there is no self hypnosis in experiments...

😊

 

Last thing : is it easy to do and learn ?

No i did it because i am retired... I did it full time for 2 years... Before that i was ignorant and frustrated as many here because i never love any gear system i owned anyway... I modified all my speakers and all my headphones with each time improvement ... But it was not enough ...And i was frustrated by my unability to pay for a very costlier one...I felt my audio system was anything but a stopgap...

When all parameters are balanced in a system/room you are no longer in a stopgap system. because the system work optimally... For sure you may upgrade it... But now it will be very costly to really upgrade and it will be less tempting too because when the S.Q. is optimal we listen music and forgot the sound...

 

All had changed when i learned by experiments how to work in these three dimensions : mechanical,electrical and acoustical...

For sure my speakers are low cost, i modified them with Helmholtz principle and now they are metamorphosed in a good piece of gear ( i hated them so much i never used them for music for 10 years) now they are my choice speakers... 😊

for my headphone i was lucky the laso one i bought was the best design and the more complex one ever make... It was my ninth headphone( i dislike all headphones even after my successfull modificatiopns) But this one is so refined one the only hybrid ever made with a grid of tune Helmholtz resonators inside a dual acoustic chamber, i was lucky to buy it... But it takes me 6 months of experiments to optimize it... it is the AKG K340 ... i even read the Dr. Gorike patent to unsderrstand this headphone ... i will not repeat all here ... 😊

 

The goal of my posts is motivate people to be creative if they had time and room for this... my goal is to inform them that it is not necessary at all to invest ton of money... it is more useful and more fun to study and experiment...

 Some people with very costly system think i am deluded... but those who are deluded are those ignoring what is acoustics...

I am more interested by hearing theory than by reviews of gear ...

 

my best to you...

I apologize if i cannot repeat all i ever wrote here ... but the principle is the more important... Each one will use the same principles in his own way...

 

 

 

 

 

In addition, when I measure something, the data speaks for itself. There is little of "me" involved in that.

You do not seems conscious that the choice of tool, the choices of the set of measures, the choice of interpretation among all tools and possible measures, and possible interpretations is "subjective" choice...😊

Techno-cultist act as this confusing scientism with science...but i will no go further about techno-cultism here in audio forum... 😉

 

 

What you do Amir is not science, if you dont want to abuse the use of this concept it is verifying with some limited set of measures the specs of a piece of gear...But alas! you go further and claim that this is objective review then "pure science" this is untrue and misleading...Because a piece of gear and an audio system work differently in different mechanical,electrical,and acoustical and psychoacoustical contexts... Nothing of what you do is purely objective...

Audiophile gave their subjective impressions and they sell their own gear choice as solution or their upgrade as solutions...This is misleading too ...

 

 

These two groups, subjectivist and objectivists, sell gear and sell their products of choice, be it a set of tool or their beloved piece of gear as solutions (outside of any specific under control acoustic context as if this obsession with the gear design will resume audio experience by itself)

These 2 groups in fact presented pieces of gear as it could be the solution ,on the contrary they should have presented really any pieces of gear as component for an acoustic problem, a problem that cannot be solved anyway either by mere tools or by adding new components . Acoustics parameters controls matter. They supposed "ears/brain/system/room" existence as one so that experience and experimentation could be possible......

 

What i do with my pieces of gear linked as one system in my dedicated room, looking for electrical,mechanical and acoustical basic knowledge is creating my own system...

I mislead no one recommending at each and everyone to study acoustics then they will understand that "timbre" is not a colored illusion for example and they will understand how to use the electrical,mechanical and acoustics parameters to improve their experience. 😊

I dont sell gear as reviewers and i dont sell my site or my favorite tool...😁

I recommend creativity and acoustics experiments. 😎

 

thanks for your kind words...

I am glad i am not alone in the cracks where truth wait between the bricks of the jailing house...

You are lucky that i never spoke english in my life... I only had read english in science books and philosophy. I know very few concrete words and no slang...

In french i would have been much more clear and much more long and proficient with hues of meanings and humor...😊

 

By the way welcome on audiogon...

😊

 

 

Arguing is useless When people are bent on hate or had no recognized common ground...

-----It appear stupid to my eyes because audio experience is a perception personal subjective experience which must be trained and educated not by gear purchase but by acoustics experiments and concepts...

-----It appear stupid to me because audio experience result also from a set of acoustical measurable of parameters between the system /room/ears. This acoustics and psychoacouistics set of measures are so impactful that the electrical specs of the gear even the speakers specs matter less for the qualitative end result ...

Then Amir techno-cultist ideology and sarcasms about "golden ears" and the audiogoners hate toward him personnaly is preposterous, as useless, as in politics the hate between Biden or Trump, or left/right, big eggs /small eggs it neglect the hidden cause and real control of the parasitic minds watchwords put on the social fabric and reflecting the techno-cultist control of Finances, medecine,politics, even the lost of science and mind by big corporation criminality.

All is very clear since Bernard Mandeville work on social fabric controls and René Girard analysis of violence.

 

«Brain grow or shrink,they never stay put»--Groucho Marx neurologist🤓

Oh no.  A Golden Ear has spoken.  Whatever will Amir do...?  ;-)

 

Insulting people will not help...Using the dismissing epiteth

 "golden ear" about audiophiles and music lovers here  will not help...

We assist everywhere in the world  to the  increasing dismissing attitude toward human  ability in favor of the techno-cult religion rising...

 

 ASR reviews are useful as are useful "golden ears" opinions because we are all human...

It is stupid to relinquish any tool measuring information...

But it is no less stupid to use only one type of measures about the gear without taking into account  our own trained hearing in a complex acoustic environment  ... ( i created my own room then i am trained enough to hear what i need for designing my room/system)

Take the despising expression "golden ear" where it belong where no one could look for it ...

Thanks for Amir reviews.... But i will let his ideology where it belong...

Acoustics and psychoacoustics rules audio not ideology of the "subjective" or  alleged "objective" kind ...

I myself are interested in hearing theories as basis for audio... Not on any tool in particular... Guess why ? 😊

 

I concur with your opinion.

I discussed enough for 10 days here with Amir and his acoustics knowledge is around DSP not basic concepts distinguishing human hearing from Fourier Maps...He does not even to understand them because they are qualitative concepts based on real human hearing abilities in the field. These concepts are useless for his reductionist ideology.

it is a man who sincerely convey an ideology as pure truth.

This ideology begun to destruct human lives in a visible manner now : it is techno cultism conflated with and then replacing science...Most people dont have the basic knowledge necessary to see this...

Intelligence does not means wisdom ...

Knowledge cannot be reduced to science save by ideologue like Popper . I prefer real scientist from formation to political propagandists as Polanyi and Goethe were .

i will stop here but techno cultism is a plague and the introduction of A.I. will make this way worse...It is easy for engineers to put into people head that inside of this statistical blackbox of A.I. trained is an intelligence superior to man. Especially with the prodigious improvement of many basic fields. We will become the tools of A.I. it is already the case. A.I. will less align on us than us on it . Narrow materialist mind will call that the progress and the future. Now guess on who are aligned the big corporations hubris for power ? No not on science as Polanyi or Goethe, but on techno cultism as religion with A.I. as God all that to control free human spirit and bent it to the will of the few.

 

So ASR is definitely influencing this hobby in the Internet era, and as with who lives in the biggest houses and drives the newest cars in my city, it’s helping tip the balance of power and influence in this hobby for the interested public and new generations of audiophiles from artists, musicians, designers and pretty much anyone with good listening skills to… engineers and computer algorithms. This makes me sad. If you were to spend anytime on ASR, you would gather that ears need not apply, their days and role in the hifi buying decision process are… over. No, seriously, if it can’t be measured by this or that analyzer, it can’t have value. Period. Now Amir may not say or think that, but the bulk of the discussion on his site adheres pretty closely to this line.

Amir has gently poked fun at one of my posts on ASR regarding some character of sound of Schiit Mani 2 phono preamp, probably something about soundstage… while others have been extraordinarily sarcastic and blatantly dismissive of any subjective comment I might make comparing the sound attributes of say, one DAC compared to another when they both measure “perfectly”.............

In summary, I do think measurements are critically important and a great place to start your audio reproduction journey. To that end, sites like ASR provide a valuable service. I do also think there are elements of this hobby and equipment design that are both not fully quantified or measurable, yet, and where art and subjective listening add real value. My concern is that absolutist worship of measurement over listening will lead many to miss out on some of the more pleasurable elements of fun, enjoyment, and discovery this hobby has to offer. I am definitely for less arguing and more listening.

 

Wise advice!

I thoroughly appreciate what ASR does to cover the "measurables", even if what Amir measures is not something I can hear.  Conversely, I can hear that which Amir cannot measure.  And many times I've been confounded by a disconnect between measurements and hearing. 

Beautiful 10k square wave.  Sounded dull and lifeless with the 3.6R.  Then connected an Eico HF-89, and suddenly there was sparkle, life, slam, soundstage, and air.  Yet the two amps measured nearly the same.  Conclusion, measurements and listening are both useful tools.  If two pieces of gear sound the same, then I'll pick the one with better measurements.  I'll always pick the one with the better sound, regardless of measurements.

great post read! Thanks...

+1

mapman you cannot understand something if you dont read about it and study few minutes.. i posted many articles above ...😊

Amygdala dont explain acoustics...

my Amygdala dont explain my books choices or my musical preference nor what i detect in sound speech no more that the way i appreciate a good system in a good room .

A word as amygdala explain nothing ... It is not false using it as i remark above , it is true it play a central role in our memory and emotion controls but this cannot explain sound qualities perceptive evaluation by itself alone ...

Between the amygdala and the ears canal and the brain/body processing of sound there is a world of processing...😊

Psychoacoustics explain it...

Read the many articles in my post above...

The reaction of a chalk board scratch is instinctive because there is no interesting and pleasing information to retrieve in it...

This does not means that all our reactions to a piece of gear will result from the subjectivity programmed history associated with our amigdala... The reason why sound please us is because sound convey meanings our brain/body recognize and create .

Tio explain how sound convey meanings we must study first psychoacoustics not study first amygdala reactive history ...

 

then you are right here :

Sound is very much part of the environment, and by being perceived in the local environment, becomes a factor in the effect had on the Amygdala, hence the individual exposed to the sound will have a reaction to it.

 

This reaction you spoke about is most of the times a TRAINED  reaction because all sounds convey  qualitative meanings.. (qualia)

But this does not prove that our sound reaction is motivated first and last by our amygdala alone, it is motivated by our ears/brain/body information retrieval skills acquired in our evolutive social history with speech and music and natural sounds interaction .

then what you say here is not even wrong but beside the main problem of sound meanings and recognition and appreciation :

Sounds effect on the Amygdala, is the dictator of whether the individual will receive stimulation to remain or remove themselves from the experience they are exposed to.

There is actually a revolution in acoustics, where it is demonstrated that there is physical invariant perceived by ears/brain/body and selected by pitch and tone filtering, informing us of the vibrating sound source qualities... Sound qualities are transmitted by waves but are not waves themselves.Sound qualities are directly perceived meanings through waves but not reducible to waves.There is always a physical invariant behind the perception of sound,a vibrating sound source empty or full, wood or metal, with or without this or that qualities etc

These facts confirmed the ecological hearing perception theory i used when debating Amir about sound perceptions superstitious use of tools . The Fourier maps are not identical with the hearing territory ...They are maps not the territory...

https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html

These two studies confirmed my point against him ...These studies invalidate Pythagorician theory non ecological theory about hearing ...

https://neurosciencenews.com/music-body-emotion-25664/

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2308859121

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-pythagoras-wrong-universal-musical-harmonies.html

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267327268_The_Body-Image_Theory_of_Sound_An_Ecological_Approach_to_Speech_and_Music

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45812-z

Amir did not understood my points at all at this time ... No scientific studies can debunk ideological propagandist...he will not understood them today it will debunk his business.. 😁 Searching for truth is not the same that building a cult or an audiophile site around ourself...So useful it could be... 😊

 

😊

The Revel dealer’s forum had fallen off my radar (when I got the useless gist of it), until a couple of guys on my listserv mentioned they had been banned for politely disagreeing on some measurement crap, like what is audible or not...In other words, his clan is suppressing anything that deviates from the caricature he paints, in the name of ’science’. But, here he is.

There are specific religions, where the land is no longer secular by law, if members of that specific religion become a majority. The lands where other religions are a majority seem to remain secular by law. You go to that intolerant land and you will have no rights, if you belong to any minority religion. But, when these intolerant fanatics come over to other secular lands (in search of fortunes or whatever), they are real Fin happy with the tolerance, secular laws and the ability to have all their rights (be themselves, speak their minds).

Draw parallels as you wish between the fanatic forum and the rest of em ...

We dont lack fanatics in the world right now and in audio threads too...On each side.

I am here and enjoy but i dont take " the upgrade urge to high end and high cost motto" seriously at all and i can use ASR if needed ( not their tools ideology though) .😊

i think we must create an acoustics audio thread ...The only audio site with the real science of hearing because if you dont know it yet acoustics is not about room panels .. Then we will not be bothered anymore by gear taste marketing snobs nor by tools electrical measures fanatics... 😁

 

Let’s be real, many, if not most members of ASR are there for self-validation—to support the notion that they can build a true high-end system on a very modest budget.

 

Some on audiogon as myself think the same... Some others not be it on audiogon or ASR ...

Anybody studying basic acoustics, adressing resonance/vibrations and adressing the electrical noise level of the house/room can reach true audiophile S.Q. experience at relatively low cost...

I dont need ASR to do that. Anyway what will they think of my homemade resonators and acoustics devices , shungite+copper plate and my modifications of speakers with cheap straws and my use of homemade acoustic materials and my use of Schumann generators etc... ? I can listen them laughing at me as  also many here ...😊

I am ferociously creative independent and know very well why Acoustics matter over anything else...

I bought the Fosi sk1 headphone amplifier and preamp thanks to you ...

But i did not buy it because it was good on the measurements test...

It is a plus and a positive fact ONLY...

I bought it because you listened to it and you wanted one for your headphone which you tested with it... 😊

You were right, a bargain for the price under 100 bucks.

Thanks I used it for my secondary headphones at night for documentaries and movies...A little music ...He drive my AKG K340 hybrid better than a very well known tube amplifier costing 20 times its price. ( i know because i tried it biased by the price tag and reviews) 😁

And what if you can’t listen to the device? Those of us who know the power of measurements, can easily deal with this. Those that don’t, miss out on great audio gear.

By the way i cannot be influenced by the look of my gear i use acoustics to modify my speakers and only use relatively low cost or vintage pieces which i modified in acoustic dedicated room .

You critics can made sense only for gullible passive consumers of relatively high cost products...

Then you accusation of biases are exagerated and do not concern people using acoustics basic...

Your ears can be very useful in assessing fidelity but not when you involve your other senses such as eyes, and sources of bias.

 

The most important measurements are acoustics measurements and parameters.

You can change the gear to accomodate a specific room , but nobody sell the house because the gear dont match the room. 😁The important set of measures are acoustics and psychoacoustics. Period. 😊

 

It is why so useful some Amir reviews could be their ideological tool measures obsession is useless for creating a good system /room S.Q.  or at least not enough ...

most people dont study nor read books...

Acoustics exist mapman...music coming from a system/room with objective acoustic parameters  toward specific ears canals and specific HTRF is not only and merely a subjective matter it is an objective acoustics matter too...

Acoustics measures and parameters are not electrical specs of a piece of gear...

Acoustics is an art based science or a science applied as an art in architecture for example or in the design of Choueiri filters etc I used it in my room and i used it to modify my speakers which became stunningly better...

I can recommend you an article if you dont like book ? 😊

 

Music is art. Art has nothing to do with how good it measures. Art appreciation is a totally subjective thing.

Many in the ASR crowd as many in this forum had no idea what is psychoacoustics...

Then they quarrel over the small or larger part of the egg... Swift cannot age...

 

Don't forget that both personal taste (subjective) and measurements (objective) come into play when buying equipment. People seem to forget this point.

People on a budget should appreciate that ASR identifies many very cost effective products that perform well.

 

When i decided to buy a preamplifier with tone controls for my secondary headphone K240 sextett, i read reviews about the new Fosi amplifier-pre... Then i read Amir review which was very enthusiastic...I bought it...

Not only it is good but better than we could think for a so low cost product...

Measured and  confirmed good specs are not enough for me  , enthusiastic users reviews for a new product unlike vintage one is not enough for me ...But put the two together and it is not hard to want to try for something under 100 bucks if you need it ...😁

And Amir wanted one for himself after his review ... Even with all his imaginary or real defects he had listen more low cost products than most users ...

Anyway i use all reviews by users and well as Amir one, the less credible one are most official reviewers 😊...

By the way this headphone amp did a better job to drive my top hybrid Akg K340 in a test than a tube amp i tried costing 20 times his price and i returned it ... I use the K340 only with my Sansui alpha though who is hard to beat... Think about how price tags could be misleading when synergy and the right amplification is needed ..

Acoustics rules audio not price tags..

 

I think Amir ASR is instructive and useful...

But i dont like their general ideology and there is one...

But insults dont replace arguments and science...

I think the same as prof here :

I always have to listen and go with what I perceive. But on the other hand there is no reason whatsoever to disparage an educated audiophile for buying gear based on measurements.

 

 

If in all of those 40 years, you had spent just one day doing a listening test blind, you would have been so much better off from that moment on. But no, you allowed your eyes and brain to interfere. And with it, arrived at the wrong conclusion, leading to wasting money left and right on things like that Denafrips DAC.

 

 

When i bought my Tannoy dual concentric speakers, a legendary speakers, i was convinced that they were among the best and after 40 years when i sell them a higher price than the price paid i know that they were reputed good for one reason : they were good...

I know it all along with my eyes and with my brain which i allow to interfere as you said, but why did i never entered in complete satisfaction ?

Because i did not know about acoustics...

What you said about these two dac based on electrical measures of their specs characteristics is right... What you did conclude is wrong ...

A dac performance cannot be evaluated out of any system , in no room , for no ears...

The two dac must be compared in the same dedicated acoustic room with a specific system for specific ears ( ideally measured inner ears and HTRF ) the specs of the dac cannot tell the tale by itself alone blind test or not ...

I let my eyes and brain influenced me when i bought another pair of speakers but at the end they did not please me till i completely modified them ...

Your stance about ears and brain is pop psychology used ideologically to reduce any sound quality to a set of electrical measurements...( simple blind tests are enough anyway and i used them creating my room )

The measures that matter the most are acoustics parameters and psychoacoustics parameters...

Seeing the gear and reading the reviews will not improve the sound ... Acoustics measures and parameters improvements will do ... The specs of any piece of gear dont tell ALL the story at best it can be used to eliminate some purchasing choices and even this minimal use of specs will not always work...

By the way thanks for you article about the Fosi audio sk1 preamplifier i bought it after reading your review and never regret it ... i used it for my secondary headphone ...😊

I appreciate your work indeed but not your ideology...

I am pretty sure you think A.I. will replace human for the better ... i do not think so ... Enough teasings, i wanted to spell my opinion ... 😎

 

Hate or excessive emotional reaction make us stupid....😊

I know what i think about i overreacted often ...

But i try to see the two sides of a coin...

I dont buy audiophile ideology of ASR for or against it but i like to have measurements ...

 

 

Americans dont pay attention to anything in the outside world... Covid crisis was no exception...Some think that covid was about for Biden or against Trump , I will not go further ...Big pharma has anything to do with science and it is a fact They use science they dont did science it is for PROFIT only ( mass control when it is militarily driven )  .. 😊

For the thread question, it is evident that there is no rosetta stone dictionary between measurements of speakers and a specific room translation of the speakers specs. and our own ears... ( The best solution is optimize our room only for specific speakers and use a Choueiri set of filters, then it is job done )

It is simple to know why when you had played as i did with the acoustic materials content of a room , his size , his geometry and topology , and the many devices we can introduce to improve the relation between ears/speakers/room...Room acoustics can induce change that will dwarf any gear change save extreme change in quality and extreme change in design between speakers or amplifiers...

Acoustics measurements rules audio not electrical measures of the gear which anyway in any good design must be driven and submitted to acoustics and psychoacoustics measurements at the end ...

In acoustics science there is the same debates in a way between ecological theory of hearing and non ecological theory...😊

Ecological theory is gaining success because our body play a role in hearing , the body image of sound from the sound source too, so much a revolution in acoustics is brewing ..

I posted three fundamental articles about this in the thread of bolong ; "the experience of sound is mysticism"