By the way, it was not your idea to support Erin regrading the recent review; some of your minions suggested it and you jumped on board.
Incorrect.
Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
1,166 responses
A rules violation, yet Erin is not banned currently.
You are so generous to allow long term rules violations to allow growth. As noted, selective rules enforcement. And of course your response to this situation is constructed to paint you in the best possible light. Must be exhausting talking out of both sides of your mouth. |
That's false. From start, Erin was pleading with ASR members for donations and repeatedly so. That link for donation remains even today. If he had post that here, he would have been banned immediately. Ditto for any other forum. Yet we gave him room to grow until such pleadings got too much so he was banned. When he went through his painful divorce, almost two years ago, I removed the ban so he could interact with the membership and that continues to this day. We probably have two dozen industry reviewers on ASR. None have posted reviews asking for donations on ASR. This is the level of conduct that is expected and implicitly understood. Above should clearly demonstrate that any accusations of competition, or bad intentions on my part is patently false.
Again, forums like this would have disallowed such monetized links but we have chosen to allow members to link to other reviews even if they are monetized. The line is drawn however at self promotion.
What you are posting is at a minimum uninformed and at worst, the half-truth you complain about. |
Happiness does not have to be earned. It is who we are. We are naturally happy when we stop mind fuc.... ourselves. It is all in our beief systems. Change your beliefs and change your life. If your parents held you as eternal love and bliss then you would be happy all the time. Your parents thought they were "humans" and somewhat flawed and non deserving. They then passed their "attitudes" and perspective on to you. This is what the whole earth experience is for. We get programmed to think we are less than infinite and we slowly remember our divinity.....the fact that we we were and are...always whole and complete. You do not have to vary in emotional waves with the circumstances of life. You can feel any way you want to.....regardless of the situation. You can sit at a standstill in your car because they are working on the road....or there is an accident and you can either moan and bitch or you can sing and dance. It is up to you. You can celebrate loosing a close super bowl.....you can dance in ecstacy when you loose. What, you say? We are addicted to our emotions. We think we have to go up and down and feel good when things go "right" and feel bad when things go "wrong"......There is NO WRONG......there is just the WAY IT IS in this moment. So, enlightenment is just digging this very moment....no matter what it presents. Easy to talk about and takes an eternity to embody. So simple....yet, so hard. That is why it is called spiritual practice. You don’t get good at something by doing it once in a while. You eventually realize that every moment is a test.....to see how loving and accepting of this moment you are. And you see......you really have no choice.....he he. You programmed this entire life as a test. You can pass the tests or not. You can celebrate your growth or bemoan your life. You will walk down the hall.....but how you walk down the hall is up to you. You can hit your head on the walls or dance and sing and skip along. That is what spiritual practice is. The practice of enjoyment. The more you practice then the more you experience it.....no matter what the circumstance. Eventually, you don’t get up in the morning and think "I need to do my spiritual practice".........for the practice has become embodied......you are now living the truth....moment to moment. We have all experienced moments that transcend time and space.....that are truly miraculous. I have been with a few people who live in the eternal miracle.....every moment. It is a blessing just to be with them and feel that extremely high vibration......the vibration of our true nature......eternal, infinite love and joy. |
Very few more positive emotions than shame and guilt. Hopefully we rarely feel these but they are a wonderful way of keeping ourselves in check. Happiness is a wonderful state of being but it must be earned. To be in a constant state of happiness requires a special type of person that is able to recognize the significance of humanity as well as the pitfalls of self-interest. Our true nature is one in which how we feel varies from day to day and is situational. |
Only part of the story. Erin may not be banned currently. He was banned from ASR in the recent past. After that ban was put in place, Amir defended himself by claiming he warned Erin multiple times but allowed violations to continue for almost a year. Erin defended himself as "monetization" links were added by others posting Erin's reviews - a situation beyond his control. Why would violation of a core principle of the ASR code of conduct be allowed to continue for so long? Appears to be selective rule enforcement to support another agenda. Half truths and a lack of full transparency are not the hallmarks of an honest broker. |
One one hand we have the untruth of Amir stating that all amps, preamps and DACs that measure a certain way are totally transparent and that all wires sound the same and that power cords, fuses, footers, getting cables off the floor, my tweako things, etc.....are totally nonesense (all because he refuses to listen to these things).........and on the other hand we have the Mahgister with his constant rants that no one cares about. You guys should take your act over to Audio Asylum.......he he. What is missing is happiness. Happiness is our true and real state of being. Basically, we mind f..k ourselves into thinking we are something else and not deserving of happiness......so we try to prove our worth....or our unworth. All false identities are just that.....false. When you just sit still and quiet the mind and open the heart.....guess what happens?.....you become peaceful and happy. Whatever you think, say, feel and do every second creates your next reality....and all your realities....and everyones reality. We are powerful.....and we can create as much happiness as we want. But being addicted to our mind and our righteousness does not bring happiness......only separation.and despair. When Amir and Mahgister are posting they are not in Bliss (our true nature)....at least, that is my guess. However, they could feel their bliss and then write words that reflect their true nature. Then we would all benefit. I try and write from bliss. I am getting better at it. Perfection takes forever.......How much more love and bliss can you or I feel and share? What are you doing on this forum.....are you looking to increase your love and bliss.....or are you here to affirm your ego beliefs? Are you here to be of REAL service? For when you feel more and more love and joy....you want EVERYONE to join in.........like Frampton said....."Do you feel like I do?" I want to feel like the Sun.....like the Moon......like eternal lovers.....like a new born baby......like a child or pet playing......like a dancer in total ecstacy.......I want everyone to feel this way. What do you want? While standing, imagine a two foot wide circle in front of you on the ground. Imagine the quality you want to embody and mentally put it into that circle....now step into the circle and feel that quality and become that quality. This is ALL there is to creation. We are that powerful. It has nothing to do with anyone else.....what they think or say or do. YOU CREATE YOUR OWN REALITY.......moment to moment. So step into conscious circles and bubbles every moment you can remember and become more and more love and joy.......It is a fun dance......and we can all join in. |
| Post removed |
It is the full truth. Fourier transform takes a time domain signal and converts to fundamental sine waves that created it. This is a proven mathematical relationship. Just like Pythagorean formula. It is not subject to debate. And no experiment whatsoever has disproven it. Again, it is a mathematical proof ("theorem"). There is an observation with respect to such a transform that follows the same in quantum mechanics called Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It says that the more you know about a particles momentum, the less you know about its position and vice versa. The comparable version for Fourier transform is that to get more accuracy in frequency domain, the less you know about its timing and vice versa. Here is a nice video explaining all of this briefly:
The research you put forward says that our hearing system due to its non-linearities, doesn't follow this relationship. That when we trade off timing resolution vs frequency, they don't follow a 1:1 relationship. But this has no bearing whatsoever on audio measurements! In audio measurements, we have a known, usually simple input signal. At no time are we interested in its characteristics with respect to time domain. What we want to know is when it goes into our audio system, does it create noise and distortion that is NOT in the audio signal that was input. Take my dashboard for example:
On the left is a simple sine wave. In a perfect system, its fourier transform would produce a single spike (on the right) at its frequency and that would be it. Above is not an ideal system so we see harmonic distortion and noise. The uncertainty principle comes into play in that I had to select large enough number of audio samples to give us the resolution we need on the right to clearly see the spurious tones created by the non-linearities of device under test. For my dashboard, I use 32,000 samples. It is true then that you don't know where in those 32,000 samples that distortion profile exist from the fourier transform. But you do know that because the above sine wave never changes! It goes on forever producing a single tone at 1 kHz. I demonstrate all of this in my view on FFT:
Because the number of samples I use is programable, the fourier transforms I show hugely outperform human ear! To wit, I can measure the frequency components of a signal to less than 1 Hz if I want. Human ear has far lower resolution, expressed as ERB:
At 10 KHz, our hearing's frequency discrimination is as poor as 1000 Hz!
No, no, no. Some of the measurements I perform have been around for nearly a century! Way before we have had any audio analyzer had any computing ability to produce fourier transform. You can go on ebay and buy analog THD+N analyzers such as this:
My analyzer produces a more accurate version of these measurements but no fourier analysis is used, and even if it had, it would not matter per my explanation above. Take this PrimaLuna tube amplifier:
You can take to the bank that it has power supply noise and distortion. There is no uncertainty about that. Finally, our knowledge of psychoacoustics is strongly based on actual human listening tests. Whatever the ear+brain can do, is already embedded in that science. The experiment you keep citing does not change any of that. So please, for love of everyone, don't keep repeating what you have been saying about measurements, how they work and their use of fourier transform, or not.
|
Last year Amir rejected from the back of his hand the competence and articles of Van Maanen i used to make my point... Today he did the same without adressing m 5 reference articles above from different scientists about the context in which ANY set of measures must be interpreted in psychoacoustics. Instead he alleged that Van Maanen made no measurements about what he spoke about. Last year he insinuated that it is only a designer selling his gear.😊 When we measure the gear piece specs to falsify or verify the design piece we do a good job; but if we extrapolate this measures as a prediction about good sound out of any psychoacoustics context of evaluation we go to far. van Maanen is also a designer and use his psychoacoustics knowledge in his own design. Amir measure specs of piece of gear, which he never designed himself, then he does not use as ground real psychoacoustics parameters based on an explicit hearing theory, save blind test to debunk audiophiles listener; then how Amir could promote as truth his set of verification claiming for it a guarantee of good sound experience ? he did this as a marketing of his site tools not as science. He is not Van Maanen. 😊
Here is a description of who is the physicist Van Maanen: «Hans van Maanen’s work has significantly influenced modern audio technology, particularly in the areas of high-resolution audio (HRA) and high-end audio (HEA) systems. His research and findings have shaped the understanding and development of audio technologies aimed at achieving accurate and perceptually transparent sound reproduction. Temporal Coherence and AudibilityVan Maanen has conducted extensive research and listening tests on the audibility of high frequencies (e.g., 15kHz) and the importance of temporal coherence in audio reproduction. His work emphasizes the need for accurate temporal and spectral reproduction to faithfully convey the nuances and details of recorded audio signals as perceived by the human auditory system. Objective Measurements and Psychoacoustic ConfirmationsVan Maanen advocates for the use of objective measurements and psychoacoustic confirmations to evaluate the performance of audio systems. He emphasizes the importance of aligning technical specifications with perceptual aspects, ensuring that advancements in audio technology translate into tangible improvements in the listening experience. Requirements for High-Resolution Audio SystemsVan Maanen has published papers outlining the requirements for loudspeakers and headphones in the "High Resolution Audio" era. His work highlights the need for accurate temporal and spectral reproduction, low distortion, and extended frequency response to fully realize the potential of high-resolution audio formats. Influence on Audio Industry and StandardsThrough his research, publications, and participation in industry events and conferences, van Maanen’s work has influenced the development of audio technologies and standards. His insights have shaped the understanding of perceptual aspects of sound reproduction and have guided the design and implementation of high-end audio systems. In summary, Hans van Maanen’s pioneering work on temporal coherence, audibility of high frequencies, and the perceptual aspects of sound reproduction has significantly influenced modern audio technology, particularly in the realm of high-resolution and high-end audio systems. His emphasis on objective measurements, psychoacoustic confirmations, and aligning technical specifications with human perception has shaped the industry’s approach to achieving transparent and faithful audio reproduction.» |
People should get their facts straight before posting. Speaking as a professional engineer now for almost a good 40 years, like him or not, right or wrong, Amir is clearly an experienced engineer and that is what he is selling. Engineering is based on math and science. That’s how our hifi gear gets produced and no two pieces are exactly the same in that regard. So I think it is often a challenge for many to understand how engineers must think and operate in order to be successful. Some engineers can lose that mold and adapt to being able to communicate better with others who do not have that background. Others not so much. Communication is a key ingredient in pretty much everything...including engineering. It’s perhaps the main ingredient in successful marketing including of one’s engineering accomplishments. People need to speak a common language to communicate effectively. That’s hard and something we all probably need to work on, including many engineers like myself and others I work with. The best engineers seldom make for the best marketing reps. Two different mindsets and ways of communicating in order to be successful. Even the best engineers make mistakes and will work to correct them. The very best engineers I’ve worked with know what they do not know as well as what they do and operate accordingly.
|
you came back answering me without sarcasm this time or insults as one year ago with laoman and few others... These small gang harasseed me this year with no post content in many threads.. They go and come back... it is true i answered their harassment instead of staying mute... I apologize when i am wrong...i did not apologize to them... They never apologize for their sarcasms.. Why did i adressed you here and during a year now if not politely and i even congratulate you nonoise? Who put a non sensical sarcasm here adressing me like one year ago about a rational discussion here suggesting two chikens cacklings : Amir and me ? i spoke of "hate" when people are unable to apologize, unable to forgot past discussions, and go on gangstalking one and going back again and again... Then i am not patient because i answer about what you forgot easily : harassments, sarcasms, no arguments save AD HOMINEM attack by 3 or 4 people you know well ... Enjoy ...
|
Amir you completely distorted what i said and Van Maanen said... i was not thinking about measurements... Van Maanen and all the other articles you dare to forgot i used here (5) are about the context of listening psychoacoustics measurement not about specific gear measurements ... I spoke of the reason why in psychacoustics concerning what we hear and the information we retrieve in any sound phenomenon your measures of the gear so good they can be and i never contest this point, as others here did, so good they could be cannot be used to predict the quality of sound aqnd it is YOUR MARKETING CLAIM ... Your answer draw the fish beside the side attacking psychacousticals question you dont ADRESS here in all 5 or 6 articles by different scientists all ;pointing in the same direction about hearing : an ecological theory of hearing..With psychoacoustics measurements in each one... You distorted what Van Maanen said and only adressed him as you adress an amateur reviewer with no measures when he spoke psychoacoustics science consequence for design and hearing music... not only that you distorted the matter saying your sinad tool is not a Fourier tool. This is an half truth. why ? All tools in audio directly or indirectly use Fourier mathematics as direct tool or as the only context of interpretation. It is easier for you to not answer anything but distort and drown the psychoacoustics fishs.. And most people here do not understand anyway, not one comment ... Three of the articles i cited in psychoacoustics are research of the last year and one from few years ago by an acoustician , which book i own, demonstrated right by 2 new research of this year, i cited above but you never adressed you did not adressed nothing save distorting Van Maanen suggesting that he is an "amateur"... Anybody can verify he is not, you are an amateur in acoustics physics and psychoacoustics..
|
He is not banned from ASR. A number of others have started to measure equipment and they do so on ASR. And I routinely promote their content as long as it is not for monetization. When Tekton threatened to sue Erin, it was me who came to his rescue, offering $10,000 personally and getting him lawyers. The latter helped him get out from under Eric at Tekton. |
If you want to take notice of measurements I suggest you look at Erin’s Audio Corner. He is far more professional and thorough than Amir. Interestingly Amir could not stand the competition and so banned Erin from ASR. Even many ASR minions thought this was unfair. In typical Amir fashion he shut down the thread because he was afraid some minions would support Erin and leave the cult. This is what Amir always does when he is challenged. |
Adding on,
As I have repeatedly explained to you in the past, many measurements I perform are devoid of any use of Fourier transform. SINAD for example is computed using simple signal subtraction (you take out the input tone and all that is left is noise+distortion which we call SINAD). Signal to noise ratio is just a level differential. THD+N vs frequency is the above but at different frequencies. We perform fourier transforms so that we can then apply psychoacosutics to the measurements. It is not by itself as you keep claiming, is the way measurements are performed. So please stop calling my measurements Fourier based. |
It is about measurement. This is from the summary right at the start: "SUMMARY. In the discussion about the perceived quality of sound systems the temporal aspect is often neglected or its importance underestimated. In this paper we propose a semi-quantitative property of systems to compare these, taking the temporal behaviour into account. We have tried to find a simple, easily to find and to interpret parameter which by no means will be the final answer to the problems encountered in audio, but can help to improve the comparison of systems in a more objective way and could help to direct future developments." It can't more clear that he is proposing an objective, measured parameter. Yet, neither he, nor you apply this to any system to measure it. Why advocate an objective measurement when you can't or haven't computed it?
What you quoted is not in this paper. Please stay on this paper instead of jumping to other ones. It is a difficult enough discussion to have without doing that.
The paper introduces a dead simple measurement of its own, which is simply met with wide bandwidth. It completely excludes distortions and noise, two of the most important impairments in audio. Once again from the paper: "Disregarding non-linear distortions, the frequency response between 20 Hz and 20 kHz of a system is very often taken as a major parameter determining the quality of a sound reproduction system." A simple impulse response is not going to tell you anything remotely akin to fidelity of the system. This measurement has been known for decades and decades yet it is not at all applied in this application. You want to call a a measurement "narrow" and preposterous, there is no better example than what is in the paper you reference.'
Nothing as such can be concluded unless listening test results are shown to prove it. Tests of high resolution music which by definition has higher bandwidth and less ringing in audio domain, have failed to provide clear audible evidence. If doubling or quadrupling the system bandwidth and hence reduction in decay time can't be shown to have value, what he is saying is in dire need of proofs, not pleadings.
There is no such statement or position in the paper. Per above, audio system non-linearities and noise are put aside and an argument is made for a single, trivial measurement that he hasn't perform to prove anything.
Which neither you, nor the author have done. Given that, the paper should be dismissed then, right?
|
@mahgister Hey magister! I don't hate Amir, I just don't like his style and motives. You're not remotely qualified to assess what I say and mean, and for that matter, never have been. You, if anyone, are not polite. You explode with anger all the time and when confronted with your behavior, you apologize. You've done that many, many times. If anyone should imitate Amir, it is you, but you don't have that ability, as you've shown time over time all these years. The patience he's shown you is more than anyone I know would exhibit. As for infestation of threads, that seems to be your forte. You've done it for years. Practically everything you've said in this thread, you've brought up before to the point of boring the heck out of members. You go off on your tangents demanding that others must respond and when one or two do respond, you claim vindication and insult other members when they complain of your tactic of highjacking a thread. You post multiple times in a row but no one answers and it spoils the thread and intention of those who want to participate. Like others have already said, they (we) just pass over what you write hoping you lose interest (at least I do). If you're of the mind, why don't you go over to ASR and start posting there and let us know how that goes. By the way, if you really think members here are "gangstalking" you, reflect for a moment as to why and you'll discover it is because of you and your manner. All the best, |
Hey! Nonoise you hated Amir but it suit you only to give him insults? We discussed and gave arguments... Amir is wrong but stay polite as a gentleman ... Imitate him ... Dont infest the thread with non sense post suggesting hate or free sarcasms instead of reason... I am fed by gangstalking people here ... |
you miss completely the argument... It is not about measurement here... He explained why it is very difficult to measure this without very serious research... You dismissed it without even getting the main point BECAUSE IT SUIT YOU..😊 The main point is here :
«We have demonstrated that human auditory perception is primed for the shapes of natural sounds,a sharp attack followed by a long decay, corresponding to the physics of natural sound production. We have used simple, direct psychophysical measurements to test for the changes in simultaneous time-frequency acuity after reversing the temporal direction of symmetry-broken pulses, lending credence to,
This fact that human hearing trained by evolution makes us able to extract information over the Fourier uncertainty limit ,( because of this symmetry breaking disposition making us sensible or biased toward to Attack-decay time), this fact make preposterous ANY CLAIM about the reduction of any auditory experience a consequence predicted by only a few set of measures on some piece of gear evaluated in the context of the Fourier linear mapping. Then your pretense to predict sound quality with your narrow set of measures is preposterous... our ears/brain work non linearly in his own time domain...The sound quality cannot be predicted from the reading of the specs of a piece of gear interpreted in a linear context with simple tools. ... We cannot replace hearing... this is why Van Maanen insisted on the importance of taking into account the way our hearing work:
«The, never mentioned, assumption is that the frequency components above the systems frequencies not present in the original signal can be generated
and/or other frequencies can acquire more power than in the original sig-
nal. This can easily be demonstrated using a 3 kHz sine wave with 5 periods
on and 5 periods off. Although Fourier analysis tells that 300 Hz is only a weak component in this signal, it is the strongest one hears. As 300 Hz corresponds to the envelope of the signal it is not surprising using the non-linear properties of our ears. It can be concluded that frequencies above the hearing limit can indeed generate signals that are below the hearing limit which could thus influence the perceived sound and the quality experienced.» All this demonstrate the complete futility to PREDICT sound quality by measuring with Fourier linear tool some aspects of the gear piece ...
We must listen...
And why we must listen it is because the human ears dont work as ASR order it , it work as Magnasco and Oppenheim experiments reveal it : it extract too much information to obey Fourier uncertainty mathematical limit. Then it work non linearly in his time domain as evolution has designed us.
Then your set of electrical measures so useful they could be CANNOT PREDICT sound quality experience... Your stance is ideological not rooted in acoustics science ...
|
The best way to deal with Mahgister’s incredibly soporific posts and Amir’s nonsense is to ignore them both. I scroll past anything by Mahgister because if I want to sleep I will take a Mogadon. As an aside, if anyone wants to see Amir called out for poor testing practices, I suggest you read this thread: |
I apologize if i did reduce your experience field as it seems. I dont know your exact background. Then i dont understand why the articles coming from different researchers in acoustics were dismissed by you... I cannot then invoke ignorance from you ... Then... it is simple matter for someone with your knowledge... You cannot extrapolate from electrical gear specs to perception of specific acoustic experience... These acoustics articles explained why from different point of view...
|
No, but I wonder if they understood the very reference they put forward. The paper is short and I must have quoted a third of it. Not just one sentence. You have responded to none of the points I raised with respect to flaws in the paper's thesis and message. Simply put, the paper makes the obvious point that if you band limit a system and then feed it an impulse with infinite bandwidth (an dirac delta or impulse), you get ringing. It then makes a giant leap saying such ringing must be a figure of fidelity and the less we have, the better. No listening test results or psychoacoustics is reference to prove this. He then says post decay is a figure of merit for fidelity and makes a bunch of unsubstantiated claims the analog systems are better, electrostatic speakers are better, etc. He never measures these systems with his own metrics and simply pleads that the reader take those as valid. Well, they are not valid as they go against solid body of evidence to the contrary. None of your posts have used this decay measurement to show better fidelity. No one in the industry or research is using it either. It is just someone's idea of that is thrown out there and you are grabbing it and running with it. And then expect us to accept it as gospel. Why? Because he has a physics degree? That degree does not at all prepare you to understand psychoacoustics, or knowledge of audio fidelity. I had to deal with another such physicist with somewhat similar claims. See this video of mine:
By your author's definition, we should use RF amplifiers with bandwidth in gigahertz to have the best audio system! Please don't reference this article without being able to explain all the flaws in it. |
@mahgister, please don't misstate my background. I grew up with electronics in 1960s as my hobby so naturally went to get my BS in Electrical Engineering. I have managed hardware engineering at no less than three companies (Sony, Pinnacle Systems (now Avid) and Abekas Video Systems). I put myself through college repairing all manner of electronics, both audio and RF. Both my education and professional experience includes signal processing, the very topic you are referencing in those papers. While I have extensive experience in software, networking, etc., that is not at all the net total of what I know. Even if my background was just software, I don't see how that would matter with respect to technical issues I found in the paper. As such, there was no need to appeal to authority in the manner you did, and proceed to put down my qualifications. |
@mapman stated: "2. If someone feels so strongly negative about another’s approach, rather than categorically trash the person (an increasingly common practice these days as more people follow bad examples they are exposed to daily), maybe start your own website that does it better your way and see where the cards fall?" Wise word for all, including Amir and ASR. Have been following ASR for several years and initially found it interesting. Over time it became clear there was an undercurrent of arrogance, group think, and rude behavior. Attacks on people and companies in the audio industry increased without any real justification. An ASR member typically starts an inflamatory thread using slurs like snake oil, charlatan, or audiofool. Any call for reason is typically met with dismissive ridicule. Wishes for legitimate and legal businesses to fail have been openly and proudly expressed by ASR members, arrogantly wrapping themselves in the shroud of science, physics, electronics, et al as the singular pinnacle of knowledge, The multitude of posts from Amir in this thread, this forum, and other forums supports that characterization. All the measurement work Amir does taken by itself is great information. Unfortunately, as @mapman suggested Amir and ASR are not satisfied to let the cards fall. As self appointed monitors of the audio industry, singular speakers of truth, and saviors to the unwashed audiofools scrutiny and criticism is appropriate and well deserved. There is one incident that revealed an ASR member questionable actions, later vehemently defended by the ASR faithful. Amir performed a fair product review, but did nothing to address the blatant attempt to negatively influence his product review. Amir and ASR faithful should not be considered pure, impartial or honest brokers only interested in improving the audio industry and audio hobby. Their mode of operation is not to let the cards fall. |
«Lastly, our observations about time-reversal symmetry breaking and the temporal https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.0513 meditate about the last line of this article to understand what means the time breaking symmetry by the brain/ears of the Fourier mapping... This symmetry breaking is associated with the way the ears/brain break this linear mapping symmetry because evolution for our own survival put us in the mode of tracking immediately the meaning of natural sounds around us... It is why we are wired to beat the Fourier uncertainty limit in extracting an information Amir claim we cannot ... But he never answered on this ... He sold his marketing site not science . And here some ask for my departure because they prefer hating Amir instead of debunking him with reason .. What a world when people keep hate for years even if this is not good for their health ...😊 At least Amir never insulted me asking for my departure...
|
It seems i am not so well loved because i post CONTENT... 😊 Not sarcasms... Not insults... Not accusations... FACTS in science ...
Ask yourself why this makes SOME reacted so much ... Even if they dont like Amir but are unable to deconstruct his marketing ideology rationally themselves only using insults ... 😊 I posted ARGUMENTS and articles... Get used to it...
|
No you dont get it ... I did not speak about subjective gear evaluation with attack and decay as main analysis parameters as you suggested here. I was speaking about psychoacoustics wiring of brain/ears by evolution history ... I dont say it is bad to do so evaluating attack and decay ... But you dont get the point of what this means in acoustics : We are wired by evolution this way, then the ears/brain is able to extract information , beating the Fourier uncertainty limit, or the Gabor limit, BECAUSE we are wired this way... The acoustic information that we will characterized as "pleasing" and "musical" will be perceived from our own brain time domain not from the linear Fourier time domain on the Amir graph measuring gear pieces ...Our brain break the time symmetry at the root of Fourier mapping... Do you get it ? Read the articles i suggested... There is way more in the other articles but if i explained it all i will be gangstalked by some because it will be too long set of posts...
I want myself a balance between all 14 characteristcs of acoustic qualities... You dont want detail and accuracy for the sake of detail and accuracy over any other qualities more than any other acoustic characteristic, save if your system /room is defective... Balance is the Key word because all acoustics 14 parameters go TOGETHER ... For sure you can want anything but i dont want to stay ignorant about acoustics balance between all factors ... |
I have seen some subjective review sites rate gear in regards to "attack" and "decay". That seems reasonable at face value. I would equate attack with good transient response, even if not measured and determined in an error prone subjective manner. Decay though? Yeah I get teh concept. Pluck a violin string and the note "decays" gradually. But I would atribute hearing that in a recording to a good quality recording of teh instrument in question combined with now noise and distortion so teh natural "decay" can be heard. At teh same time, I don't want my hifi gear to add "decay" artificially even if that in theory sounds better to the average dude. I want accuracy and detail in my sound reproduction. That means low noise and distortion but not just in theory. I find teh gear that in fact measures well on noise and distortion tends to do all that stuff better....ie more accurately. No artificial filler, which might sound great. If others want that ie more of a "good" sounding thing, fine. Tube gear with high efficiency speakers to help compensate is a reasonable way to go. TO h-ll with measurements! |
I did not insult Amir. I just stated what was true...........that much of his thinking is an ego trip. This is just truth. Not an insult. We all have an ego. If we did not we would walk into the street and get run over. We need the ego to survive. However, we do not need much of it to live a glorious life. If Amir was here I would kiss and hug him and tell him how beautiful he is. When someone says something not true then it is up to everyone who knows the truth to chime in. If we let lies prevail then the ultimate truth (that we are eternal love and joy) will not be attained. All truth is tied together. Whether it is physical truth or metaphysical truth. If we speak with forked tongues then we all lose. Say and live the truth. The truth is.....everyone is totally in love with everyone and everything.....forever and ever. However, it takes a million lifetimes to realize it totally. We have eternity. We don’t NEED science to know what is real.....about audio or about life. We are a miracle......70 trillion cells dancing in love and joy. We KNOW what is real. We experience it directly. I don’t need a science lesson to know which DAC sounds better. I use my ears. If you want to continue and fight Amir using words and science quotes......then have at. But does it bring you happiness? Do you feel more love and joy when you post?.......I am listening right now to some incredibly spiritual music and the sun is shinning outside my window and the leaves are dancing in the wind. It is always a miracle. I wish more of this for you and everyone. Please stop fighting and TRYING to prove you are OK......and feel how loved you are. Go outside and put your arms up in the air and proclaim to the whole world......"Thank you LIFE.....for the glorious love that you bestow on me right this minute. I feel so blessed. I will spread this love and joy to everyone. Thank you, thank you, thank you.....forever" You are worthy.....you are worthy......you don’t need to do or say anything.....you are worthy just as you are. You were always worthy.....will always be worthy. Let it in....let it in....let it in.........you DESERVE IT. You are magnificent!!!! Here is what I am listening to....right now
|
--- Many Subjectivist are fetichist of their gear pieces Brand name as SOLUTION for all ... This is illustrated by all audio thread...😊 It is not always bad i used statistical analysis of all reviews to buy my gear) ---Many objectivists are fetichists of their own measuring tool and only bought what their tools dictate... ( specs are useful for basic electrical synergy and designing minimal standards of quality thats all they are mostly meaningless to predict sound quality )
If you had read my posts instead of insulting me and asking me to quit , you will know that i use my ears and i use also objective acoustics parameters measures to create my own dedicated room based on Helmholtz principle among other basic acoustics facts.. I never proposed my favorite gear as SOLUTION for the only reason it is my fetish object of choice as others did all the time ( i modified my gear anyway😋) ... And i dont propose my fetish tool as the ONLY solution to gear purchase as Amir does... i for years advocated for many low cost tweaks ... ( i was insulted for that as thin foil hat ) but i am most interested in acoustics science now because i go deeper in experiments ... Then if you can think you can see that i am not fetichist about any object, gear or tool , but i am interested by acoustic principle to install the gear and make it work at his optimal level ... ( i modified my headphone and my speakers) Complete success at peanuts cost thanks to acoustic experiments and other tweaks i designed .. i promote reading basic acoustics.. ( not just room acoustic basic) Then i cannot be accused of fetichism because there is no object on which i focus my exclusive interest save science and experiments in acoustic.. Then you insulted me with NO REASON ...
|
Stop projecting! You accused others of fetichism. I just pointed out yours accordingly. Also I read the article. Does not help me determine what to buy in any way. I am fetish-agnostic . I take it all in. Your fetish appears to totally consume you to the point of not being capable of considering anything else. Help us out. What specific gear is best in your assessment? How did you make that determination?
Thanks.
|
I don’t need to deconstruct Amir. He is perfect, just the way he is. Some of his beliefs are not based in truth....and someday he will truly understand. We all will. Are you superior to me because I don’t quote science articles? Why would I care what others say about listening? My own ears know the truth. Be true to yourself. Stand in your truth. You don’t need to fight.......anyone....ever. You are perfect....just the way you are. Do you feel more love towards yourself and everyone after you post? After you put up all those links to articles practically no one reads? I want you to feel better and better about yourself....every day.....I want you to make every post you write a beautiful love letter to yourself sayng how much you are loved. I love my self with all my heart and soul......WE are ALL so Beautiful.......Kisses and hugs. Here is a song I sing sometimes: "There is nothing to need, hide from or fear. We are whole and complete, right now and right here". |
---Here electrical specs of gear: A ---Here psychoacoustical characteristic of human hearing about the way our brain extract information from natural sound, because our ears is biased in some time breaking symmetry direction. B Then to connect A and B we need to know how to measure and design the gear accordingly to these psychoacoustics characteristics...because our brain is wired in some way by evolution to perceive in a non linear way ( with sharp attack, long decay) all sounds in his own time domain ... Then no Fourier maps of gear specs as Amir use them can predict sound quality for our ears evaluation... Amir said no , we dont need that, only the electrical tools we use are good enough to predict S.Q. This contradict elementary psychoacoustics research... Do you get it ? Stop accusing me of fetichism , you project onto others your own image ... Grow....And read... I underline the essential for you to ponder over : «We have demonstrated that human auditory perception is primed for the shapes of natural sounds,a sharp attack followed by a long decay, corresponding to the physics of natural sound production. We have used simple, direct psychophysical measurements to test for the changes in simultaneous time-frequency acuity after reversing the temporal direction of symmetry-broken pulses, lending credence to, |
