You say you dont sell components but own a company that sources components through Harman and perhaps other companies. Madrona sells electronics yes?
No. No retail sales whatsoever. We bid on large contracts for full system installs most of which have nothing to do with hi-fi.
The money you make off these sourced components makes money for Madrona yes?
Again, no. I explained that about half a dozen times someone wants me to source them products. I am fine if they do, or if they don't. It is round off error for Madrona business and probably costs us more than it makes.
Vast majority of products I recommend are not handled or sourced by Madrona. If there is, then a full cautionary note is provided to put readers on notice, unlike your posts here.
I can tell by the way you answer these questions there is more to this than you are letting on.
Nope. I have had a successful career prior to founding Madrona and ASR. I am in need of no income from either. Don't judge me from your vantage point. You are not similarly situated.
I would think that my dealer status should be obvious.
Not at all. It wasn't until yesterday that I searched through your posts and landed on one sentence saying you were a dealer. It was a totally improper omission on your part.
Where did say that I didnt like Ralph's designs or the man? I like Ralph personally
By saying he wasn't your favorite designer. You need to make up your mind.
Please a list of the industry people that have helped ASR become an industry influencer.
I can't give you their name as that would violate their privacy. Go on ASR and look at people's titles. It won't be long before you see Dealer, Reviewer, Audio Company, Industry Luminary, Technical expert, etc.
I just checked and we have 204 members verified to be an Audio company. Examples are KEF, Genelec, RME, Purifi (Bruno Putzeys), Kali Audio/Ex-JBL, Neumann, Hegel, Benchmark Audio, Schiit, Danley Labs, Weiss, etc.
We have 21 audio reviewers. Examples are John Atkinson and Kal Robinson of Stereophile.
We have four Audio Luminaries. Dr. Floyd Toole, Dr. Sean Olive, James Johnston (ATT Bel Labs and my chief architect in last job), and the late Scott Wurcer of Analog Designs.
We also have 40 members of industry that have the special title of "Technical Expert" who have deep understanding of science and engineering.
|
Not bad for being half in the bag, again. Wine is the universal solvent to all manner of ailments.
All the best,
Nonoise
|
Oh my God it is like talking with a child. You keep going back to this Harman test.
I also gave you example of a member here, MikeL, not being to pass a blind test and thereby, showing that his sighted evaluations were biased by something other than sound. You haven't had an answer to either.
Did these people know they were being tested? If so, then all data can be dismissed
What? Every category of tester was put in the same situation of evaluating speakers blind. Tests were repeated and variance computed. Salespeople like you had very high variance meaning little consistency in their evaluation of speakers.
JAES, peer reviewed by people who believe as you do so this means very little.
Is that right? How should we rank the value of random salesman on a forum then? Just believe it?
Did Harman put on some dull music and then call it a day or did they play different music of different genres.
Already answered pages back. Harman researched what type of content is most revealing of speaker performance. And that is what they use:
AES Paper, The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products
Sean E. Olive, John Jackson, Allan Devantier, David Hunt, and Sean M. Hess
AES Paper, A New Listener Training Software Application
Sean Olive, AES Fellow
Harman International Industries
AES Paper, Differences in Performance and Preference of Trained versus Untrained Listeners in Loudspeaker Tests: A Case Study*
Sean E. Olive, AES Fellow
Some of the tracks:
Tracy Chapman, "Fast Car", Tracy Chapman
· Jennifer Warnes, "Bird on a Wire", Famous Blue Rain Coat
· James Taylor "That's Why I'm Here", “That’s Why I’m Here”
· Steely Dan “Cousin Dupree”, “ Two Against Nature”
· Paula Cole, “Tiger”,” This Fire”
· “Toy Soldier March”, Reference Recording
· Pink Noise (uncorrelated)
James Taylor, “That’s Why I’m Here” from “That’s Why I’m Here,” Sony Records.
Little Feat, “Hangin’ on to the Good Times” from “Let It Roll,” Warner Brothers.
Tracy Chapman, “Fast Car” from “Tracy Chapman,” Elektra/Asylum Records.
Jennifer Warnes, “Bird on a Wire” from “Famous Blue Rain Coat,” Attic Records.
These fall in the #1 and #2 categories above for the most part.
|
@markwd - thank you for your gracious reply and question. There is actually nothing I criticise regarding the measurements done at asr. It is how those electrical measurements are expressed and used to conflate belief with truth that I object to.
Science has always been about the balance between empiricism and rationalism. In medicine, bloodletting was an accepted practice of belief in good health against all empirical evidence, and carried on unabated for two thousand years, until it was rationally uncovered and proven to be otherwise in the 18th century when the last indoctrinated societies finally found rational evidence to collate the empirical.
This is the issue with asr, and really, amir himself, who often hides behind the emblem of what he has made of asr - asr is still all his and about him, however much he wishes to distance himself from the rational doctrines of belief he has boxed himself into. He will claim he still relies on empiricism, which cannot be trusted, because of the inconsistency with which he claims listening is more vital than measurements, and when he then laughs off all claims to listening. He cannot even trust his own hearing, in multiple posts where he says he heard a difference, and then ceased to hear a difference after a while. And his hearing difference always happens after a measurement, never independently of. He openly admits he cannot trust his own hearing, despite all the tests he has taken, but then goes on to say no one else can, when it is a known fact there is a huge of listening ability in human beings. He makes you believe you cannot trust your hearing, only because he cannot trust his, appealing to your having had similar experiences, when most of us haven’t developed our listening skills to hear the difference. This is the basis of indoctrination.
True scientists work by way of the dialogue empiricism has with rationalism, never just one or the other. Technicians work only one way, using predetermined rationalism for process and arrive at conclusions. And they are not wrong! They are merely there to help us with what is known, not what needs to be discovered.
The problem is that amir positions himself as a scientist, when he’s really a technician.
Ok, that then leaves the empiricism of listening to question. How does one know that what one is hearing is actual, or mere confirmation bias, independently of measurements?
For this, we need to understand what high fidelity actually means. Defined, high fidelity does not refer to the fidelity of the signal, it never has! You can study this or look it up - high fidelity refers to the reproduction by electrical equipment of very high quality sound that is as similar as possible to the original sound.
Based on this, you can see how ludicrous it is to suggest that equipment measured with the best signal integrity equates to that of high fidelity - this is the very reason why so many audiophiles complain about many good measuring equipment sounding bad; measurements have never been the arbiter of fidelity, our ears are.
This is not to say that it is then reduced to a shallow matter of preference, as we all have a very very powerful point of reference - while we each hear differently, the source from which the original sound was emitted is shared by us all, be it a live bird, angry dog, Guarneri violins in general, or the way an old Steinway sounds in a particularly reverberant room. A correct understanding of high fidelity takes a whole lot more effort from each audiophile than merely referencing readouts and graphs from a technician’s monitor - the foundations of high fidelity itself are built on the development and honing of one’s listening abilities, to hear all the nuance and subtlety of the time domain that characterises the realism found in original sound - it is the watchful eye we each have to place on ourselves to detect bias, in placing realism and the truth of one’s perceptions over how much or how little we want to spend on our hobby. No one said it would be cheap, expensive, or easy….and, definitely no where as simple as taking a reading off a monitor.
Markwd, this is why audiophiles do not only rely on measurements, and in fact cannot merely rely on measurements - signal measurements do not and have never been the most vital part of high fidelity.
There are preferences, mind you, but one thing is clear - there is very little argument when a system of true high fidelity is heard. And I do mean in a room or space where the set up has been well judged and tuned to bring out the very best from that system, measurements be damned.
Don’t be misled into thinking, like many audiophiles do, when hearing the simply awful sound of a multi million dollar system in an audio show or at a showroom, that hi-end hifi is all a scam. I have found very few to have been set up well. Most importantly, I always reserve judgement until I can have whatever piece of equipment put into my own system, in the familiarity of my own listening and tuned space, and specifically located and adjusted speakers. If high fidelity is the true objective, there is ultimately only one metric of its final gauge - developed listening ability in the context of an entire system set into the specific context of its listening space.
I hope this has made sense to you.
In friendship - kevin
|
Wow, such revelatory hostility! Dealers circling the boutique wagons in glamping configurations and boasting that their listening punditry is better than this stale, shrill modern stuff.
But we can do a bit of the kind of brainstorming that goes on in disruptive/dintermediating business plans. The boutique/high end audio equipment makers should produce mid-fi but excellent measuring components that become leads to the high-end components. They can reduce costs the standard way with manufacturing in Asia, use well-engineered chip amps, etc. It doesn't matter that those mid-market offerings are competing with many others. As long as they perform (measure) well enough they will get sales traction.
But, more to the point, they become brand ambassadors for the dealers and the higher-margin components. So what if they are mostly the same just with 60 pounds of heatsinks to allow for an additional 200 WPC into 8 Ohms. The high-end buyer may be trading up from the middle tier.
Brands that do this successfully include KEF (LSX -> Meta Blades), Chord even, Revel, etc. Now that sounds like a business model that can embrace the reality (and future impact) of ASR's measurements dashboards. The boutique shops just need better market planning and implementation rather than just being engineering (and measurement and, yes, listening) driven.
|
>high fidelity does not refer to the fidelity of the signal, it never has!<
OMG! What incredible bullshit.
|
@kevn
Right, I have no deep objection to most of that. I was curious what aspects of electromagnetism do you think are in fact contributing meaningfully to the high fidelity reproduction of music that are not contained in those measurements? You seem to have dropped that?
The rest of your rather long description is arguable but mostly not objectionable. Your characterization of how science works vs. Amir vs. technicians, for instance, appears to continue your general dislike of the presence of "science" in ASR.
There clearly are aspects of science in there up to and including his scientific survey paper on the performance of audio components. The measurements are part of the survey and the hypothesis is that there are not strong correlations between cost and measured performance. Now, you can argue that other sciences work in different ways than that but it follows the description that I previously provided. No scientist I know would object; they just do their science. But are you worried that the imprimatur might give new audio equipment "seekers" some kind of false belief that all they need is this particular kind of ASR science? I'm not too worried!
Your final paragraphs focus on the notion that listening in a specific space and matching components is in addition to the capabilities of the components. Of course! There are extensive and lively discussions on the science of room modes, the role of DSP, damping, integration, impedance matching, and many other topics at ASR. The measurements of the individual components and the listening by Amir to confirm aspects of those is not changed by the additional discussions or how any given audiophile will need to find the proper fit of the components to create their optimal experience.
I personally think much of it is overwrought and it is oldie audiophile snobbery that trends towards the negative stereotypes that are claimed (minions, brainwashed, etc.) for ASR folks in a reverse-golden-rule manner, but I hold out a kind of stochastic hope that given enough discussion and enough resources, searchers will begin to find and understand enough that some of the mythologizing that has been wielded for commercial gain will be abraded a bit.
Like I note, I'm curious how internet/social media change our engagement with exactly these kinds of topics that were once knowledge constrained by dealers, small-circulation magazines, audio shows, etc. I've never been to or subscribed to any of that stuff but it once was a contained marketing ecosystem that built stories as much as performant products. Times change!
|
I am taking a break from this discussion in part due to inspiration from the latest post from kevn. This member communicates properly and with respect.
|
@audition__audio Excellent! I'm glad you are off to ponder proper and respectful communications!
|
@deep_333 - I get you, thanks for your post : ) - but I will always engage those who either don’t prevaricate, or at least acknowledge when it is being done. More vitally, the hope is my posts are being read by those on the fence, you see, who might be persuaded that the relationship between empiricism and rationalism is required for better knowledge and informed choices, and not just one over the other…..and certainly not measurements as final arbiter.
But it is an uphill task facing the indoctrinated. One of them from oakcreek doesn’t even know the definition of high fidelity, and has been so brainwashed by asr into believing it is about signal integrity, that he hasn’t even bothered to look up or study what high fidelity is, or where the term came from.
My hope is that others will.
i haven’t yet lost hope for markwd, but it will take a while to revert.
@markwd, thank you for your reply - I hope you have the patience for my response - a touch busy today : )
In friendship - kevin
|
@kevn Take your time! I just got back from the symphony and got caught up myself. I just do this for fun anyways. I have neither ego nor business nor status invested in this topic but do find it fascinating, like friscalating light through a dusty chandelier.
|
@markwd thanks for that - ok then, what first needs to be established is a datum we can both agree on. The gist of this datum is the tradeoff made over measurements - this is most clearly established in the Heisenberg principle of uncertainty, and it’s somewhat equivalent in acoustics, the Fourier uncertainty principle.
What the Heisenberg principle of uncertainty says is, at the scale of quantum mechanics, it is not possible to accurately measure two related physical properties of a particle simultaneously. This is to say that if the velocity of a particle can measured accurately, there will be doubt regarding its precise location, and vice versa. If that doesn’t already sound bells in your head, take a look at the Fourier uncertainty principle which limits the precision with which the simultaneous measurement of both duration and frequency of a sound can be made.
The full article is here https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html - originally posted by one of our learned, if a touch longwinded members, mahgister.
The article establishes that among a group of mixed participants and careful listening tests, that the human cochlea, non-linear as it is, equalled or outperformed the limit set by the Fourier uncertainty principle, in one case of both frequency and timing scores, by a factor of 13. The top score for acuity in timing was for three milliseconds.
That’s three thousandth of a second.
If you will allow this datum as a qualified test of human hearing acuity, we can proceed with the conclusions for the test - that our hearing is not only capable of performance equalling that of technical instrumentation in relation to independent measurements of frequency or time, but it exceeds that of the simultaneous measurement of both frequency and time, limited as testing equipment is, by the Fourier uncertainty principle - this is vital, as the foundations of music itself are built on the simultaneity between frequency and the time domain.
I hope you better understand now why Amir’s are not everything - he cannot accurately measure both frequency and timing, the very tenets of music, at the same time. He argues against the proven science of the Fourier uncertainty principle if he claims he can.
In relation for electromagnetism, which you relevantly queried me over explanations being left incomplete - you know markwd, never mind the Fourier uncertainty principle limiting the simultaneous measurement of frequency and time; never mind why I hear realism that measurements cannot explain; the profound world of electromagnetism is still beyond the full understanding of rational science itself.
My intention was not to answer any questions regarding the relationships between magnetic flux and the audio signal. I wouldn’t have a clue! I only have the hypothesis of its absolutely importance, being so much a part of how electricity itself is transmitted. It was only vital that I got you interested in the question, because that is truly what science is all about: what part does magnetic flux play in audio signal transmission that we might be missing?
Science is as much the asking of empirical questions, as it is the delivery of rational answers. I hope you get more involved in all of science, and not just its rational side : )
In friendship - kevin
|
@markwd ”But are you worried that the imprimatur might give new audio equipment "seekers" some kind of false belief that all they need is this particular kind of ASR science? I’m not too worried!”
Sorry I missed this, markwd. The thing is, when I started my audiophile journey, I knew nothing. Like most others. It would have been so easy to be sucked into the convenience of measurements to justify all my purchases, as anyone wanting to get best value for dollar would. However, i have never been one to take the easy road, and found it necessary to first understand the multiple viewpoints of any one issue, and then the relationships between them all for balanced decision making. It takes immense effort to slowly build that comprehension of what hifi audio is about, and not an undertaking most would want to see through.
What got me truly started was the definition of high fidelity.
I realised most of us start our journey with a misconception of what the term means. The exact origins of the expression will probably never be known, but it is generally agreed that its usage was first seen in Billboard magazine back in 1933. Even before that however, the obsession existed to recreate the sound experience of live music through the recorded medium.
High Fidelity has always been about the reproduction of high quality sound through electrical equipment to be as similar as possible to the original sound.
Back then, distortion was so completely everywhere, it wasn’t even an issue - all that mattered was a medium that could just deliver some semblance of realism to the reproduced sound. They found it in vinyl. However awful those needles were back then (and they were practically big ugly heavy crappy needles) that semblance was reached. Everything thereafter became one long road of refinement to bring sound reproduction closer and closer to the original sound. To make sound reproduction more realistic. The absolute fidelity of the signal was never a goal - what mattered was how the reproduced sound compared to the original sound.
We turned high fidelity into signal fidelity at some point.
It really was to help make things, decisions, easier; to have some quantifiable and rational basis for commonality and reference. And so, our original reference that was the original sound, became marginalised, and for many, forgotten. We don’t need to make the effort to improve listening ability any more - the measurements did it for us.
Except that it didn’t - particular kinds of distortion, in fact, bring reproduced sound closer to the original sound. The manufacturers discovered that tiny relevant imperfections in the audio signal help create a closer approximation of realism. High Fidelity is this incredibly nuanced kitchen of finding that balance between eliminating damaging distortion from, and introducing relevant imperfection to the signal to bring reproduced sound closer in realism to its original sound source.
Heresy, if opined from the viewpoint of signal fidelity, but hey, signal fidelity has never been what high fidelity is about.
This is what makes the arguments that amir or any one else whip up from their measurements seem so silly, they’re arguing for pure signal fidelity in a hobby where its accomplishment defeats the entire purpose of high fidelity.
So yes, it is false belief and indoctrination I post against, because I want every audiophile to hear the amazing realism that is possible with the wonderful equipment that is out there, which they can only access when they develop the difficult and time consuming skill of listening and hearing ability.
In friendship - kevin
|
@kevn I previously addressed the issue of these hearing-excess-of-Fourier arguments as well as heterodyning and nonlinear effects within the ear. The problem isn't that there are interesting experimental results, it's that they don't demonstrate that there is anything that can be done to audio equipment to implement better solutions to whatever gaps may be present. For instance, if I am a DAC designer there are several different pathways to accurately reproduce a signal but there is no theory that says one approach will improve over another in matching the nonlinear merging properties of higher and lower frequencies in the cochlea.
Now, you can suggest that somehow listening on the part of the designer is allowing them to choose between design pathways but this is just speculation. It may be true, as I noted to @mahgister, but we don't know and neither does the designer.
So there is a certain faith built into all this speculation, just like god-of-the-gaps arguments in other online communities ("listening-in-the-gaps" arguments has a nice ring to it!). It's interesting but needs proof and a proper measurement methodology that shows a path forward for determining exactly how these phenomena impact equipment design and use.
Since you are a bit of a student of ideas in philosophy of science, one key one in contemporary thinking on the topic is lifted from Wittgenstein that we must remain silent on things we have no knowledge of and we have no knowledge of this. Until we develop it sufficiently we do have an AP and spectral sweeps.
|
@kevn Thank you so much for your analysis, putting into stark relief what I attempted to state in more basic language. Also thank you @markwd for your cogent comments. I've been stating the same thing in two Audiogon forums with 2000 posts (and Amir condescending arguments which are invalid for the most part).
I have only one complaint in that the vinyl LP and crude stylii were the initial semblance of high fidelity sound. It was the magnetic tape that predated that attainment of sound quality. Today, it is still true that the mastered analog tape is closer to the recorded sound than the disc, unless the disc was recorded as direct to disc. I only have about 200 R2R tapes from the 50’s and 60’s and most are quite good (7.5 ips and 1/4 track). Better tapes are now available but relatively expensive. With 31,100 LPs, I often desire to obtain higher fidelity than encoded on my records. I keep most of them for the performances (live and studio) that are unobtainable from alternate media. I also really appreciate CDs as a convenient and often superior format but I admit I have superior playback equipment. Until recently, I preferred analog playback, now it is dependent on the mastering more than on the format.
Thanks again Kevn!
|
@kevn I'll just add one footnote to my previous post: we might actually be able to address the specific issues of heterodyning and nonlinear cochlea interactions in audio by using DSP to simply mute tones that interact in those areas of the hearing range. This would be like addressing a room mode but within the ear itself. Of course, we would be robbing the signal of its fidelity in so doing.
Still, in order to do this we could use experiments that first demonstrate it will improve human hearing. There is a great deal of literature on methods for overcoming hearing loss; there may be something in there concerning speech that points towards something useful for audio equipment design.
Let's get that gap filled in!
|
I did look at ASR as several friends touted the Topping DAC, specifically, D70s as the finest in their lineup, a balance of resolution and liquidity/musicality. Well, they are relatively inexpensive and now three of us own one. Coupled with fine quality transports (mine is a Jay’s Audio CDt3 Mk3), it extracts CD quality sound rivalling analog LPs. I have replaced it with a Lampizator Poseidon at 50X (!) the cost (not getting 50X the improvement though, more incremental). ASR touted the Topping unit as the best at the time (2021?) but soon thereafter replaced it with an even lower noise version the D90. Unfortunately, new versions don’t translate into better sond, just better measurements in this instance. My prior experience with older Topping DACs was negative, just too raw sounding, an unsettling listening experience, typical in my pre-2005 feelings toward CD playback. Even my transport costs 10X the Topping. It is a truly great unit. I read last week of a high end recommendation for a $100 DAC, possibly an SMU unit that is also a huge bargain for a DAC. It’s amazing what new design technology can do to benefit music lovers to sonic bliss. I have a relatively good ear and cannot say one way or the other why one unit’s design and materials are superior to the other as I have inadequate electrical knowledge but I am shocked at how affordable DACs (and for others who stream) good sound is available.
|
I don’t understand all the hostility to Amir and ASR. He provides valuable insights and information into our hobby. As many have noted, the problems started when Tekton’s owner threatened to sue.
|
If you are on a budget, and or cynical and angry about the high end audio costs, or are very "scientifically" oriented then ASR can help you find gear and have very good sound. If you really want to appreciate the soul of music....the soul of life......then the equipment recommended there will not do the trick. There are many mansions in heaven. ASR is the lowest high end mansion. There are far more blissful and happy realms above. I recently moved my planar mid/tweeter forward relative to my woofs 3 mm.......when I hit play....I started to cry. It was so real and beautiful. You will get way more of the "soul" of the music with other gear. Yes, it costs more, but it does not have to cost a ton of money. You don’t need to have a $150K Wadax DAC to make you cry. I have a modified $400 SMSL DAC that makes me cry......but I am sure if I had a few thousand dollars to spend I could get a more expensive DAC and mod it and I would never stop crying and dancing.
This is the problem is ASR......because Amir claims that all DACs, and preamps and amps and cables all sound the same (when they measure a certain SINAD) then he is telling his minions that they have arrived at the highest level of fidelity.....all while spendng a moderate amount of money. Nice myth.....but completely untrue. He is like a primary school teacher teaching you basic math and then saying to you, that you have all the knowledge you need to make a rocket and fly to the moon. He is like a childrens softball coach saying that you can now go into the big leagues and hit a hardball out of the park. What a joke. Limited knowledge equals limited experience.
What is the fun of being an audiophile if you cannot constantly improve the sound of your stereo and get bigger and bigger goosebumps? Amir says all you need is a Topping stack, a pair of his approved book shelf speakers and generic cables and you are set for life. Then you just drop out of the audio game, because there is no where to go. You notice how angry the ASR people are? They lynched me and banned me. Not because of MY rude behaviour (which there was none). It was because I sold tweak "snake oil" things.....so I was the devil (a money grubbing scum bag). The reason they are so angry is that there is a lack of soul when you limit your experience. And they know their experience is limited.....but on an ego level....they identify with this limitation and fight for its existence. Very sad. It is so much more fun to share new ideas on how to improve your stereo. You learn from each other and you get more and more goosebumps.........or you can fight for your limitations. The ASR types go around in the forums and point fingers and say....."bad voodoo"....."bad voodoo". However, three fingers are pointing back and them.....it is all projection. They are the unhappy ones. Of course, there are people who are angry who listen and have better sounding gear. But at least they are moved to soul levels with their stereo once in a while.
However, if you stay at the bottom levels and never experience what real soul levels there are (this goes for life as well as audio) then you will be "content" in your ignorance. Ignorance is not Bliss.....Bliss is Bliss....and usually comes with great maturity......even though its a childs essence.
A Topping stack will never sound as good as a great turntable system.....maybe a cheap turntable system. There are levels and levels and levels.....it is infinite. If you want to spend very little and not look at the possibilities of things then ASR can work for you. If you want to KNOW what is possible and attain such sonic bliss then you must look elsewhere. Don’t settle for a Honda Civic (that the dealer told you was just as fast as a Corvette)........You can afford to spend a little more to get better sound. You are worth it. You are magnificient. Hondas are great. But it does not really go that fast. You want a soul ride? You want to really experience what the composer and artist intended? You want to really FEEL something beautiful and powerful and exciting? You can, you can, you can. But you must find it yourself....you must trust your experience to know what gives you goosebumps. If you follow any one persons advice to what gives you happiness then you are just their sheep.....Be a lion of knowledge....be bold and trust yourself. You can do it. It is a fun ride.....Enjoy.
|
@ricevs I think your metaphor may have gone awry there towards the end since we can measure the differences in performance between the Civic and Corvette?
|
You see how your ego driven mind will just have to come in and say "something is wrong"? This is the nature of the mind......it is a MAKE WRONG MACHINE. You understood what I was saying......you get it....yet your mind still had to find something wrong and then comment on it. You did not comment on what was right with what I said.....just what you felt was wrong. Please be greateful.....life is a constant miracle and you can continually grow and experience more of the amazing love and joy that has always existed. Wow! We are so magficient!!!!! I love you.
Every single thought you think, word you speak, feeling you feel and action you take.....has a certain vibration....that keeps creating itself over and over again. This is how we create our reality.......by the quality of thoughts, words spoken, feelings felt and deeds done. What is the quality of life you seek? Create that quality with your thoughts, etc........Watch your thougths.....for they are at the beginning of creation. Think happy thoughts....bless others....send them blessings.....stop giving the finger and instead give your heart and soul.
|
@ricevs Well, it's a collection of nice sentiments, sure, but I don't see any reason not to include ASR rankings and reviews in one's journey of music and music equipment enjoyment...just another data point! You indicate some at ASR are mean but, hey, the world is filled with many types. I just ignore them and focus on the value-add.
|
markwd,
Totally agree. ASR has its place.
There was a woman on Youtube describing her Near Death Experience. When she was out of her body, she experienced more love and joy than she had ever felt. After a while God told her that her time was not yet and she would have to go back into her body.......She pleaded with God, saying she was a good person and helped others, etc......which was true. Then God says to here.......did you Love them like I am loving you? She replies......How can I? I am not God!......He looks at her and says.....YOU CAN DO BETTER........and immediately she was back in her body. This is what life is about. We can do better. For we are made in the image and likeness of the almighty. Be kind. Everyone is your child. We are the children, we are the world.
|
Until this year, I was using Legacy Signature IIIs (superior to the Focus) which I purchased in 2004 for $1600, running them with highly modified Dynaco ST70 (tremendous bass when made a voltage regulated amp rather than ultralinear) or with a simple tube pre-amp. My friends still use older tube gear and their audio systems are fabulous sounding. I have the ability to splurge and enjoy high end sound now in my custom built room while keeping that system above for the living room (quite impressive to guests-out of the box sound that is rich, dynamic, enveloping and with great dispersion). Yet for analog, I’ve gone backwards in price and am using a Dynavector 20X2L. It is perfectly set up in a highly modified SME IV-sounds great on so many LPs rather than just the best recorded and pressed. $1100 cartridge in a $200K system plus I don’t fear using it or breaking it compared to a much more expensive cartridge. Now that I have solid state amps (Westminster Labs REI) as well, the only continuing cost is replacing the cartridge every 3 to 4 years.
The main problem with ASR is Amir. If he were a congenial host who conceded that there are many ways to audio bliss which can include exotic and/or high end gear, he wouldn’t be demonized. Look at What’s Best Audio Forum. Most posters are congenial and obliging of alternative views, anxious to hear what’s new, posing answers as to what improvements can be made to existing equipment. Generally, it’s expensive equipment. No one ever put me down when years ago I posted the question if most CD transports were not as important as the DACs. Of course I was 100% incorrect.
|
@fleschler I guess I'm still baffled by this kind of sentiment. It doesn't impinge one iota on your preferences for others to state that X or Y has better objective performance than some choice you made. You b u!
If someone says something like, well, there is no evidence that cables make a difference, to me it's worth learning why they make that claim and what reasons and testing that they are citing to back up their claim. You can of course carry on thinking that cables do matter and you can hear a difference, but at least you have learned an alternative perspective.
I guess I side with @ricevs on a happier way of engaging with online communities, though I'm calmer in general and not quite so ecstatic! 😎
|
@markwd Is it me or are you damning with faint praise a bit too much?
It's getting a bit off putting.
All the best,
Nonoise
|
@nonoise Gradualistic repositioning of the audio Overton window 😂
|
@markwd You hit the nail on the head. I was evicted by Amir from ASR a couple years ago (I knew nothing about the site at the time but noticed it was very active). I mentioned that I preferred a digital cable and of course, maybe a dozen acolytes tore me a new one for not adopting their "cables are all the same" and "fuses are all the same if they measure the same" mantra. I noticed another post concerning an isolation platform for large amps and they did the same to him. ASR has a place but so many vitriolic members that it's a big negative "vibe" (ironic). Well, I'm glad to have Audiogon and WBF forums where I can trade information and learn.
It was J.Gordon Holt in a about 40 year old Stereophile who imagined activated carbon filtering built into walls as bass traps. I took his advice and did the same in my 2019 custom built listening room (see my profile for details about my room). When Von Schweikert came to set up speakers as a friend, it took only 1.25 or 1.5 hours instead of his 5 hour blocked out time frame. The room is so well designed/built that it is a breeze to set up (without resorting to DSP). I finally had the great sound and dispersion that I never had after 20 years of stats and then 22 years of dynamic speakers (except those Signature IIIs in my living room).
|
So many opinions on how Amir & his moderators treat posters who don’t fall in line with the forum.
Funny thing, I posted a thread here about my experience of testing some AQ Dragon power cords where I didn’t hear a difference.
It was misstated twice by the same poster that previously I had auditioned $80,000 worth of Transparent cables. I assume that was to make me look foolish or like a liar. Even when I corrected the poster about the value of Transparent Super cables he persisted & repeated the lie.
Same poster referred to my experience & discussion with the dealer who sent me the Dragon cables as hearsay and doubted that I actually had the Dragons to evaluate. IOW called me a liar again.
He then referred to my posts as bullshit.
Another referred to my posts as being a part of the Naysayer Church (multiple posts referring to this Church) that wants people to blindly follow science.
I was told I was boring, just send the cables back. I was mocked for inviting my neighbors to listen & give their opinion. Then it was agreed by many that the problem was that my speakers were too close to the wall behind them, apparently just inches away (they were 48" from the wall behind them). I was told the problem was that I have a tin ear (ignoring all of the other people who came by to compare cables & heard no difference, including one man who manufactured speaker/XLR/power cables & brought his by).
In the end a poster that lived nearby came over with his speaker/XLR/power cables and a power conditioner and we had a listening session. For each change in cable he couldn’t hear a difference. When they were all connected he felt there was a small difference but wasn’t interested in a blind listening test.
After the results of that session were described the thread died. This forum isn’t hugely welcoming to people with different opinions either. I haven’t been banned yet so I’ll give you that.
|
@dwcda the difference is you are still here, you didn't get you posting privileges taken away.
|
- His company is also posed as an integrator, which implies that he sells AV gear. I would wager that he sells Sound United products (Denon/Marantz), because he he’s been measuring the low sinad and granting happy panthers on Denon products. His minions go wild and feral when they hear the word "Denon".
Madrona doesn't "sell" anything. We have no retail operation, nor online. And no showroom. D&M is a top AV brand and as such, have heavy requirements for demo gear, amount you sell per year, inventory, etc. before you can become a dealer. For this reason, almost all of their dealers are big box stores. Existing stores would also want their turf protected which makes it even harder to become such a dealer.
As a result, most AV integrators will source products through a distributor. They mark it up so what you pay as your cost, will likely be higher than what a big box store puts them on sale! Translation: you have no prayer of competing for business against major dealers. For the handful of AV Receivers we install every year as part of much larger project, this is fine but if you are going to try to sell things, it is a losing proposition.
If you go one step down to Yamaha for example, you can get that line and indeed Madrona is a "dealer" for them. After being asked repeatedly to test one of their AVRs, I bought one out of my pocket through Madrona. See this review of Yamaha RX-V6A:
If you are not familiar with "panther rating," the above means it is mediocre and not recommended. That review starts this way:
"This is a review and detailed measurements of the Yamaha RX-V6A "8K" Audio/Video Receiver (AVR). They only announced two such 8K AVRs and this is the upper model. Our company (Madrona Digital) is a dealer for Yamaha so I was able to purchase this at a discount for testing. Retail cost is US $600."
Notice how the reader is put on full notice immediately on potential conflict of interest. Needless to say, after that lackluster review, I got stuck with the unit. No one was even interested in buying my discounted sample let alone more of them at normal price.
Back to D&M, I have repeatedly given poor ratings to their products on the Marantz side. See this review of Marantz AV7705:
$2,200 processor gets my "headless panther" indicating a broken design. Why? Because they took the Denon platform, screwed it up from usability and performance point of view, and sold it for more!
This went on and on until last year where they finally decided to give the proper option for the filter and improved the performance of the HDAM buffers based on my feedback to the company. That then resulted in a great review:
Marantz AV10
So this is a great example of the impact ASR has had on the industry. Even major companies like this are paying attention and using measurements to improve performance of their products.
To be clear, only one person has ever asked me to sell him an AV product. That was a Yamaha and when I gave him the price, I think he decided to buy it elsewhere and that was that. Did I tell you I hate the business of selling audio gear? I thought I did.
|
Most problems arise when listeners make assertions in which no listening is involved. I applaud those that admit they dont hear a difference. Takes guts. In the end you listened and this is all that matters.
FWIW, it takes alot to get banned on this forum. Which is as it should be.
|
The main problem with ASR is Amir. If he were a congenial host who conceded that there are many ways to audio bliss which can include exotic and/or high end gear, he wouldn’t be demonized
You are wrong. I own high-end gear. I recommend high-end gear. Here is an example: Mola Mola Tambaqui USB DAC
Conclusions
The Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC shows again that just because a DAC is designed from ground up, it need not perform poorly. It is actually the opposite with it performing at the top of the class with respect to distortion and noise.
Since I am not the one paying for it for you to purchase it, it is not my issue to worry about the cost. As such, I am happy to recommend the Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC based on its measured performance and functionality.
Nearly $12,000 streamer/DAC is recommended.
What I don't recommend is high-end gear that takes massive steps backward in performance, attempting to please audiophiles who believe in myths. Here is the direct competitor to above, the PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC:
This is its distoriton+noise relative to frequency (in blue):
This is the Mola Mola (now in red):
PS Audio is selling you a noise and distortion generator. Mola Mola is selling you a state of the art DAC. Both are custom solutions. One designer (Bruno) knows what he is doing. The other, not.
This is what measurements do. They bring clarity and cut through marketing claims and user random opinions. When they speak, they speak. Build me a $100,000 DAC that performs well and it too would get a recommendation from me if it looks gorgeous, performs great and has nice and easy functionality.
You don't have an answer for these facts so resort to personal remarks and blame game.
|
@markwd “The problem isn't that there are interesting experimental results, it's that they don't demonstrate that there is anything that can be done to audio equipment to implement better solutions to whatever gaps may be present.”
- Thank you for your reply markwd - but, like amir, you obsess over the equipment a little too much : ) - my discussion of the test was to underline the entire point of mahgister raising of it, which you again missed - it was to inform about how powerful our sense of hearing is, that we can and should reclaim that birthright instead of leaving it to handicapped measurements to do it for us. Why handicapped? Because measurements will always be limited by the Fourier uncertainty principle, while human ears aren’t. Why is that principle important? Because it limits the measurement accuracy of frequency simultaneously with time, the very foundations from which music flows. Are you following now?
@markwd “Now, you can suggest that somehow listening on the part of the designer is allowing them to choose between design pathways but this is just speculation. It may be true, as I noted to @mahgister, but we don't know and neither does the designer.”
- I do not suggest anything of this, markwd - it IS happening, this is how the best audio equipment designers in the world are designing their servers and DACs, while of course putting equal effort to improving power supplies, and reducing realism damaging distortion. They are simply not applying signal fidelity as much as high fidelity, to their process. Do please reread my earlier post on this : )
@markwd “So there is a certain faith built into all this speculation, just like god-of-the-gaps arguments in other online communities ("listening-in-the-gaps" arguments has a nice ring to it!). It's interesting but needs proof and a proper measurement methodology that shows a path forward for determining exactly how these phenomena impact equipment design and use.”
@markwd “Since you are a bit of a student of ideas in philosophy of science, one key one in contemporary thinking on the topic is lifted from Wittgenstein that we must remain silent on things we have no knowledge of and we have no knowledge of this.”
- I believe you took Wittgenstein quite out of context - he wasn’t discussing the lack of knowledge in his quote, but the clarity with which we should be using language. The correct quote in context here - “What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent.
- Ludwig Wittgenstein: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
@markwd “Until we develop it sufficiently we do have an AP and spectral sweeps.”
Yes, we might use analysers to help with room set up, but no, in fact, if the measurement of equipment is all that will be done for decisions - it is more correctly stated that until we are able to determine how to accurately measure frequency simultaneously with time, we have our more accurate ears to help us on this difficult but amazing and rewarding journey. We just need to apply ourselves to each develop our listening abilities.
@markwd “I'll just add one footnote to my previous post: we might actually be able to address the specific issues of heterodyning and nonlinear cochlea interactions in audio by using DSP to simply mute tones that interact in those areas of the hearing range. This would be like addressing a room mode but within the ear itself. Of course, we would be robbing the signal of its fidelity in so doing.”
- you once again fall back on signal fidelity without fully understanding it matters less than high fidelity. And ‘equipment’ (in this case the tech of DSP) is again your default to address that human laziness inherent to putting effort to developing listening ability. Markwd, you have to grasp the fact there are no shortcuts in our hobby. Measurements will bring you signal fidelity, and that’s all you’ll ever have. Be happy then.
@markwd “Still, in order to do this we could use experiments that first demonstrate it will improve human hearing. There is a great deal of literature on methods for overcoming hearing loss; there may be something in there concerning speech that points towards something useful for audio equipment design.”
- With all due respect, I’m concerned there may be a disconnect with how you read, and comprehend with what you write - there is nothing wrong with the human hearing apparatus. Well into our seventies, while there may be a big drop in our hearing the upper registers, all our abilities to detect frequency/time nuance is still robust and functioning - the enjoyment of music continues with every fibre in our being. What needs to improve is the development of listening ability, not the apparatus we are born with. I hope you understand that distinction.
In friendship ; ) - kevin
|
@fleschler
Thanks for your kind words, flescher, I can get long winded too, and I’m so happy you got something from my long post. And you’re so absolutely right about magnetic tape - it is actually one of the prime reasons I believe the magnetic side of electromagnetism holds secrets we haven’t plumbed just yet - something to do with the analogue continuity of magnetic flux that we all receive some benefit of in its transmission of audio signals, while it defeats the discrete nature of digital music….and all attempts to understand the discrete measurement of it, haha. I didnt put it in only because I wanted to draw more attention to how high fidelity began rather than evolved.
On a side note, your posts over the past four years were some of the many that helped me along this amazing wonderful journey I’m on - it’s medicine unlike any other. Thank you so much!
In friendship ; ) - kevin
|
Look at What’s Best Audio Forum. Most posters are congenial and obliging of alternative views, anxious to hear what’s new, posing answers as to what improvements can be made to existing equipment.
I co-founded What's Best Forum (and came up with that name!). So I speak from actual knowledge that we had battles between members like no one has ever seen. Raging wars would better explain it. It got so bad that I had to sell my half and go and start ASR as people became incredibly rude and intolerant of any measurement or talk of science. In some sense, if people were cordial and respectful of everyone's opinion, ASR would not exist!
So if you want to pick an example and say I am the bad guy, you should avoid referencing WBF. 😀
|
Speaking of WBF, my partner used to always keep telling me that he had brought all the members there and without him, we would not be anyone. Well, look at current stats as far as visitors:
This clearly shows that the audiophile community cares about objective performance of audio gear, and science and engineering behind it.
|
What is the fun of being an audiophile if you cannot constantly improve the sound of your stereo and get bigger and bigger goosebumps?
You can do that all day long with better speakers, headphones, IEMs and room response. These are are all the areas where variability is there. In case of speakers, you do indeed need to spend more to get more in many cases. Even spending $100K+ on speakers would not be out of line as long as the design is right. Getting high dynamics there is going to cost you as does deep bass extension.
With respect to DACs, you can get a superb, transparent one for a few hundred dollars and be done. Amplifiers can cost money as you want to get as much power as you can. You also want them quiet or you would get hiss out of the tweeter.
Screwing around with cables, footers, etc. is all waste of money based on extensive objective and subjective testing that I have done. If that makes you unhappy, then I say you are putting higher priority on screwing around with your hardware than listening and enjoying music.
|
Amir still here?! Come on.....let's do what he does on his forum....let's ban him forever (like he did me and many others).....Give him a taste of his own medicine. Not serious, he is perfectly fine being here as long as he is nice......unlike how he treats people ON HIS FORUM. He is da rulla. He gets what he wants.
Amir, why are you still here? You are not making any new friends. No one believes you about your basic point of view except those that already were predisposed to false science, followers of yours, angry cynics and the like. You are NOT gaining any sense of credibility. The more you post the more people come out of the woodwork and talk about your gestapo tactics, etc.
I am glad that Amir recommended an expensive DAC. Of course, he thinks it sounds the same as his $900 Topping......which is why he never seriously listened to it.....and if he did he would say they sound the same. Everyone, please read the reviews on the Topping and then on the Tambaqui Dacs.....completely different class of transparency.....except to Amir....he even thinks stock $400 Dacs are sonically the same as the Tambaqui. He is missing so much musical pleasure. He is missing the soul essence of music.......which is easier to feel when your stereo has REALLY low distortion (and I am not talking about numbers measured.....but ears heard)
I think it is time for this thread to be closed......really getting boring. Nothing more needs to be said.
|
Amir, why are you still here?
As I have explained, this thread is directly about ASR. People like to discuss the very forum I have created so I am here to give first hand answers. You have a choice of posting anywhere in this forum yet you are hear arguing with me. What you want me to tell you?
|
I am glad that Amir recommended an expensive DAC. Of course, he thinks it sounds the same as his $900 Topping......which is why he never seriously listened to it.....and if he did he would say they sound the same.
It would. It has to based on science of how our hearing works. Same science predicts issues with PS Audio DSD DAC and that is what my listening tests indicated:
"Listening Tests
For subjective testing, I chose to use the recently reviewed and superb Monoprice Monolith THX 887 Balance Headphone Amplifier. This headphone amp has vanishingly low distortion and hence is completely transparent to DACs being tested. For the alternative DAC, I used my everyday Topping DX3 Pro 's line out RCA to Monolith. I then used the XLR input to connected the DirectStream DAC. Once there, I played a 1 kHz tone and used my Audio Precision analyzer to match levels using PS Audio's volume control. PS Audio claims perfection there ("bit perfect") so I figured they can't complain about that. The final matching was 0.3 dB difference between the two.
For headphone I used DROP + MRSPEAKERS ETHER CX with its XLR connection to THX 887 amp.
I started the testing with my audiophile, audio-show, test tracks. You know, the very well recorded track with lucious detail and "black backgrounds." I immediately noticed lack of detail in PerfectWave DS DAC. It was as if someone just put a barrier between you and the source. Mind you, it was subtle but it was there. I repeated this a few times and while it was not always there with all music, I could spot it on some tracks.
Next I played some of my bass heaving tracks i use for headphone testing. Here, it was easy to notice that bass impact was softened. But also, highs were exaggerated due to higher distortion. Despite loss of high frequency hearing, I found that accentuation unpleasant. With tracks that had lisping issues with female vocals for example, the DS DAC made that a lot worse."
See? I don't say all DACs sound the same.
|
"The main problem with ASR is Amir. If he were a congenial host who conceded that there are many ways to audio bliss which can include exotic and/or high end gear, he wouldn’t be demonized."
It certainly is. He is arrogant with little to be arrogant about. He is also rude and condescending and brooks no counter arguments. His attitude promotes the rudeness exhibited by many, (not all I agree), of ASR members. I was ridiculed for asking about information about Dacs and asked if anyone had heard the Meitner range.
Posters on other sites have commented on how his tests are often flawed, yet he sets himself up as a Messiah.
Look at the number of people he has thrown off his site, yet he comes here and bleats. I have never met him and have no desire to do so.
|
@kevn Well, we certainly do seem to talk past each other. Your responses demonstrate that you are not quite internalizing the problem that I put forward. Sure, we have this great hearing capability and some experimental results that suggest some curious little edge phenomena but we have no way of actually telling whether it is useful to us in the context of music reproduction and listening.
We can't design systems that exploit it or, if we do, no one has demonstrated that they have done so. For instance, let's say that human hearing can detect aspects of music that are not distinguishable based on the spectrum and that the designer figures out a way to use that to improve the system, the way to establish that is through a consistently reliable ABX test that shows this remarkable new achievement while the signal measurements are otherwise unchanged. Or, the other way to approach the problem is to figure out how to measure the ability down to the level of granularity of the human ear, perhaps using approaches that are not applying FFTs for analysis. Then, voila!, we have a new measurement regime to use for designing equipment, etc. Measurements prevail again!
The other possibility as I discussed is to figure out a theory and model for how it improves on our ability to process music and then incorporate those findings into the design phase. Hence my suggestion that there may already be some insights in the hearing-loss literature...I'm not sure how you read my comments on that as somehow suggesting I wanted to improve age-related hearing loss! To be clear: "Still, in order to do this we could use experiments that first demonstrate it will improve human hearing." means that we need experimental results that show that my proposed method of DSP-ing to counteract heterodyning/nonlinear cochlear phenomena would actually improve on the listening experience, improve our hearing, rather than artificially scramble our natural interpretation of the sonic landscape, reduce our capabilities or just be neutral.
WRT the Wittgenstein quote, I was mentioning that it has been internalized as a way of expressing the epistemic humility of contemporary science crossed with the requirement for positive evidence of novel claims, but thanks for the clarifying context!
|
@dwcda
Im sorry you had a bad experience with audiogon, dwcda, and I’m glad you stayed on - that’s the nice thing about this site - it really takes a huge lot to get booted : ) - I appreciate that kind of tolerance. And there is a huge variety of members here, who come from all kinds of audiophile persuasions and beliefs - it makes for a terrific pot to hear it all; for all views to be heard; relationships between those viewpoints to be made; and clearer decisions to come to. Thrive in it. Please do not allow dissenting or even rude views to upset you - it’s a varied and wonderful place to find your own learning from. We all learn and grow from diversity and adversity, never through the agreement and laziness that homogeneity breeds.
In friendship - kevin
|
@markwd ”WRT the Wittgenstein quote, I was mentioning that it has been internalized as a way of expressing the epistemic humility of contemporary science crossed with the requirement for positive evidence of novel claims, but thanks for the clarifying context!”
You’re welcome, markwd! More later ; )
In friendship - kevin
|
So many opinions on how Amir & his moderators treat posters who don’t fall in line with the forum.
Funny thing, I posted a thread here about my experience of testing some AQ Dragon power cords where I didn’t hear a difference...
...I was told I was boring, just send the cables back. I was mocked for inviting my neighbors to listen & give their opinion. Then it was agreed by many that the problem was that my speakers were too close to the wall behind them, apparently just inches away (they were 48" from the wall behind them). I was told the problem was that I have a tin ear (ignoring all of the other people who came by to compare cables & heard no difference, including one man who manufactured speaker/XLR/power cables & brought his by).
@dwcda - Most people within that thread had actually encouraged your observations, agreeing that if you don't hear a difference you should send the cables back and not waste money. Your initial response was taken as sarcasm by one individual and it seemed to have kicked off an argument between you two, which you're attributing to represent all of Audiogon. Some unsolicited advice I can offer is to not take it personally and not to dwell on the matter. It's the internet. Your time and focus are better spent elsewhere.
Personally, I can say I've spend the equivalent of a new well-equipped automobile on Audiogon and AM classifieds and appreciate the personal experiences shared on forums like Audiogon that have led to those purchases. I've met great people during these exchanges and it still amazes me when I wire a large sum and get the thing I ordered in the exact condition described on an Audiogon listing. I am much younger than most typical audiophiles, but my first observation was/is that they're an extremely opinionated, but well-intentioned bunch. I don't get the same impression of the folks at ASR. They remind me of some of the bitter critical theorists I've had the displeasure of meeting whilst in academia.
To sum up, I interpreted that thread much differently than you are describing it and would encourage you to move on.
|
Every DAC that measures the same will sound different.....this is what those that listen know. Every amp that measures the same will sound different.....this is what those that listen know. Every wire that measures the same will sound different....this is what those that listen know.
Those that do not listen? How can they have an opinion on what they did not experience? This is crazy. To suppose a distortion measurement on some machines actually signifies in total how something sounds is literally insane. NO LISTENING = NO KNOWLEDGE.......No serious listening tests to prove your measurement theories = BS......plain and simple.
YOU CANNOT KNOW WHAT SOMETHING SOUNDS LIKE WITHOUT LISTENING. You cannot know what something looks like without looking. You cannot know what something tastes like without tasting......etc. to infinity. Our own senses are the most scientific instruments ever existed. We are meant to experience directly.....not live through machines. Machines are soul less. That is why a Amir approved cheap Topping Dac sounds soul....less.....because it was designed for MEASUREMENTS ONLY. The designers who listen....design for good measurements and GREAT SOUND......Topping does not have great sound. This is what all the reviews describe......Most say they are great for the money.....some say even other Dacs for the same money are better. No one who has heard more expensive Dacs thinks the Topping DACs are as good......no one....except for Amir and his Minions.
|
Yeah academia. What a trip!
At least with some academics you get some viable arguments and up until recently discourse was encouraged.
My advice is to trust your instincts. Take what Amir has posted on this thread and judge for yourself. Take a close look at the responses of other members and then think of your experience with people in your past that exhibit certain tendencies and judge not only who to believe but who is attempting to engage in meaningful conversation. A lecture or discourse. Further take a look at possible motivations. I respect the attempt to indoctrinate for financial gain more than an attempt to indoctrinate for the satisfaction of one person's ego.
Read these forums, visit both sites, read what the members have to say and how they treat those with whom they disagree and take note. Further avoid people that are constantly taking about themselves and attempting to convince you of their worthiness or superiority. A true asset to this community will let others build them up and will let the hobby decide who is a true asset. Avoid people who speak in terms of absolutes and avoid people who discourage you from buying based on anything but actual experience.
Enjoy the trip. Music and audio can be a wonderful journey despite the best efforts of those who will try to convince you that you cant trust your own senses. Even more ridiculous is these people may attempt to convince you they have your best interest at they discourage experimentation.
Many of us will be dead soon so it is encouraging to know that there exist a few enthusiasts below the age of 50.
|
Wow need to proof before posting. Who knew! Should be "have your best interest at heart as they discourage experimentation".
|
What more proof of Amir's arrogance are his own words.
I co-founded What's Best Forum (and came up with that name!). So I speak from actual knowledge that we had battles between members like no one has ever seen. Raging wars would better explain it.
Bold letters to emphasize patting yourself on the back as oh so clever and smart.. Disagreement with what you were peddling you characterize as "raging wars". You had no role in the battles and were completely innocent of adding fuel to the fire?
It got so bad that I had to sell my half and go and start ASR as people became incredibly rude and intolerant of any measurement or talk of science. In some sense, if people were cordial and respectful of everyone's opinion, ASR would not exist!
How ironic to cite rude and intolerant as reason for your departure. Seems like that model of behavior followed you to ASR. But, of course, rude and intolerant is perfectly acceptable at ASR when it is in support of you and measurements. The final put down and demonstration of your superiority is another chart comparing visitors to ASR and Whats Best. Real class on your part.
Amir has turned this thread into a rent free branch of ASR. Abusing Audiogon with excessive cut and paste of ASR material as if sheer overwhelming volume will crush disagreement or valid criticism.
|
