Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews

Really on thin ice here. You keep quoting the one A/B where someone did not hear a difference as your proof that your "pretend science" is true. 

He is a great example because he is the uber version of you all.  He is a member here and you can question him if you like.  And his experience in this test is fully documented and not some folklore you are repeating.

Again, I can link thousands and thousands of posts and quotes and videos and online and print magazine articles that say the exact opposite....again....who has truth?

You certainly don't have the truth because you don't follow the simplest protocol to make sure the results are valid and indicate fidelity as perceived only by your ear.  Further, plurality of people confused doesn't make them right.  People lack awareness of how their perception works.  By not reading and learning the science and engineering, they are easily confused.  See this video for example:

Does not equal 

All the best,
Nonoise

And here comes the graphs……… be all end all. lol. 

Really on thin ice here. You keep quoting the one A/B where someone did not hear a difference as your proof that your "pretend science" is true. Again, I can link thousands and thousands of posts and quotes and videos and online and print magazine articles that say the exact opposite....again....who has truth?

And over and over agian you post about your one time that a DAC measured poorly.....so you listened to it and it sounded bad......However, you never listen to any DACs that measure what you like because you think they measure good enough that they are transparent.....this is WHAT YOU BELEIEVE.....and it has never ever been proven. You simply made it up.....that is why it is false science. You have NO science on your side....you have measurements and then a "belief system"......you have no proof. As, I have previously stated....you are in an ego loop....defending a position that is undefendable. I predicted....yes, I PREDICTED.....that you will probably never give up your position this lifetime (you have invested in this belief for so long and now have a website promoting it, etc).....so far, I am correct. I would like you to prove me wrong....and become a more honest person.....Honest.....means ONE with what is (EST). The WHAT IS.....is that all DACs, preamps, and amps sound different....and all cables sound different....and we can hear it. But you cannot.....or shall we say....WILL NOT allow yourself to even try to hear it......You are simply stuck in a belief system....ego based. Happiness is not in that system....happiness.....looks for, and expresses what is real....what is true. What is real is how beautiful you are.....how magnificient...and always have been and always will be. That is real. Ego defending is NOT REAL.....and NOT happiness promoting...for yourself or anyone.

Sure loves his Chineee Dacs! lol. If they all sound the same and are perfect to human hearing why keep measuring them. Why ever change one out?? Think the Toppings of the world aren’t benifiting greatly from Amir’s unconditional praise? Think he’s gettin paid…? Yep I lived in China for 6 years in a professional position. He’s either gettin paid or turning it down like I did. Somehow I think he’s not. 
 

Also my my main question was how do you measure dynamics?? Never answered it. Just “Said” how loud something can play, then you said it’s not a real thing , then in your blog on you asser site you were raving about some amazing dynamics! So… how do you measure dynamics with your test tones?? I’ll just keep posting the same question since you won’t answer it….you snotty little p…k

For every stupid post that you come up with that states that all DACs sound the same...

I have not told you all DACs sound the same.  Indeed I have post expensive DACs that are not transparent. 

What I am saying is that you all have no prayer of backing your sighted listening tests when you don't use your eyes and perform a controlled listening test where only the sound differs.  You fail miserably in controlled testing where the outcome is known so we can check your answers.

Who is right? 

Science and engineering.  It predicted that MikeL wouldn't be able to tell speaker cables apart in controlled testing, that he could sighted.

Go on, find another person who agrees with you and link it here....go on...Let’s ave it!!!!!

Countless people agree with me who come to ASR.  I even post people from your camp such as the long standing member here with half a million dollar system that could not tell his uber expensive cable from cheap.  Here you go again: 

---

It was the Transparent OPUS cable ($46000), not MIT.  Here is the link.

"And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up."

And there were four total listeners, not three.

Wow, I am really starting to question your intelligence. Why would you post such nonsense? Don’t you think we cannot see right through that post?

A member? Of course, he is a member.....he cannot hear. About 5% of audiophiles (my quess) cannot tell a difference between anything. They are some of the "members" of ASR....the rest are cynics, "measurement science freaks" and non believers who won’t even listen . I have read at least 2 posts (and I go there seldom....so there are probably tons of comments like this) by your "members" that stated they could hear no difference between components.....you see, these hearing impared people flock to your site.

The other guys video is fine.....However, his title is "click bait".....for the real title should be. "This is the best DAC under $1000 that I have ever heard.....and I have not heard them all". He has never listened to any higher priced DACs....let alone the Gishelli. But I trust what he said......he said the latest Topping "sounded better" than any before it......meaning....DACs all sound different.....which makes your statement of "All DACs that measure a certain number of SINAD are completely transparent".....a LIE....a big fat LIE......and YOU posted it. Thank you....Great job of convincing everyone how really FOOLISH you are......Do you have more posts like the one above? I am sure you will have to have the last say......so, start searching....I give you a few hours........What a JOKE!

For every stupid post that you come up with that states that all DACs sound the same....I can link thousands of posts and videos....saying they all sound different. Let’s see.....one for you and thousands for the other opinion. Who is right? All those thousands who listened....or you (who will NOT listen)? Go on, find another person who agrees with you and link it here....go on...Let’s ave it!!!!!

You’re pretty-much buying a disposable device you anticipate may never get a firmware update and may die at any moment.

Firmware updates are rarely needed on DACs.  When they are, they are absolutely provided by the likes of Topping and SMSL.  Now, high-end companies, that is another matter.  I bought a $10,000 TacT processor years ago.  Paid another $5K to upgrade it but didn't get a chance to test it right away.  Eventually I powered it on and noticed some channels were no longer working.  Go on their site and find a new firmware.  I upgrade the firmware, reboot and the thing gets stuck in an infinite loop on power up!

I contact the company owner/founder/designer.  Told him what happened and he said I am screwed as he no longer supports that product.  The thing is still sitting here in a closet as I don't have the heart to part with it.

My Mark Levinson DAC that I bought for some $6,000 back in 1999, broke down.  I had to fix it myself, replacing a blow capacitor.  Company had promised upgrades but none were ever provided for newer/higher sample rate.  It too is sitting in storage while a Topping powers my DAC.

My other electronic failure has been a DAC made in Germany.  Its USB interface just stopped working one day.  This product cost over $1,000.

In contrast, I have about 300 to 500 DACs here, mostly from Asia.  None have failed on me.  Majority cost less than what it would take to ship my high-end gear to be repaired!

As to return policies, there are places that give you that such as Audiophonics in France.  You can also buy them from Amazon and if there are early mortality, get a refund or replacement.

The dude you are responding to spent $25,000 on his DAC.  The sales tax alone would buy you not one, but two of the best DACs Topping makes!  And it is not like he can get support from anyone local.  He would have to ship it to EU for repair, deal with customs and who knows what other grief to get it services.  And you better believe a tube product is going to have far more problems than any of the DACs I recommend.

I haven’t heard the D70, but heard their D90 III and it was terrible. 

Had a member send me $30,000 worth of CHORD DACs/Resmpler/Cables for testing. I asked him how fast I needed to test them and to my surprise, he said to take my time.  And that he had bought a Topping DAC and couldn't tell the difference between them so he was going to use that until I returned his gear.  Who is right?  You or him?  Measurements demonstrated by the way that the two DACs would sound the same but of course, Topping was more than 30 times cheaper.

Then there are views like this:

Again, are you right or him?  

Topping sells thousands and thousands of these models.  Why is it that they don't all return them if they sound "terrible?"  

I tell you why: until you learn to only assess fidelity with your ears alone, you will continue to live in the fog of subjectivity and not know what is what.  Once you do these tests properly, then you will that there is no conflict between objective performance of these products and what you truly hear.

Was it Bruce Brisson who developed the first Monster ICs the M300? That was the best cable for the price although it had soft, rolled off highs and limited resolution but it had a smooth, warm mid-range. Today, a comparable inflation adjusted cable that is extremely superior is Bedlen/Blue Jeans ICs (well, the XLRs). I use their XSRs in a $200,000+ system.

I heard 3 levels of Transparent speaker/system cable at an LA Show where the more expensive the system (up to $750K), the more awful the sound. Don’t even mention High Fidelity cabling with those horrible giant in-line magnets.

As to the Topping DACs, I’ve now heard 5, mostly early ones with the super high resolution but poor musical sound. The Topping D70s turns out to be their best. My best friend uses it in a modest priced system anchored by Von Schweikert VR35 export speakers. In my system with Lampizator Poseidon DAC/pre-amp which is $25K, the Poseidon is NOT 50X better than the Topping. Maybe 30% to 50%. I paid more as it was designed as a pre-amp and the Topping pre-amp is awful (probably just a cheap op-amp). As a DAC, this Topping is super musical osounding. It lacks the dynamic contrast, soundstage width and depth and music separation (instruments/voices) of the Poseidon but unless there is a head to head ccomparison, it’s a tremendous bargain and physically unimposing. The SOTA DAC costs much more than a superb one. I also own a (near or actual) SOTA CD transport in the Jay’s Audio CDt3 Mk3. For $5K, it is 5X to 10X less expensive than exotic French and Swiss transports or even upper cost Esoteric units.

@fleschler 

I’m not familiar with all of Monster’s models, but found an article that talks about the relationship and history. I’m assuming every model since those early designs is some variation (aside from the mainstream Monster products that were sold at Best Buy) based on those patents. I also have some bulk Powerline Signature 400 cable and it’s comparable to what Furutech is selling for many, many times the price.

Stereophile: Noel Lee Interview

I’m a bit skeptical of those listening tests since there are pretty easy ways to game them. The Kimber one at Axpona compared also their cheapest (thinnest) cable with their high end. I like Kimber and own a run, but a better test would be to compare a similar gauge wire.

I haven’t heard the D70, but heard their D90 III and it was terrible. I do like SMSL’s ES9039MSPRO-based DACs for the price and leaving it in a spare system. The bigger problem with Topping/SMSL is that product support is nearly non-existent and their sales channels are an absolute nightmare with some genuinely dishonest tactics (such as many burying their ’certified’ no return policy). You’re pretty-much buying a disposable device you anticipate may never get a firmware update and may die at any moment.

I don’t have extensive DAC audition experience, but have heard MBL’s 101 X-tremes at a private audition, which were running through their Sigma Delta-based DAC (not sure the chipset) and I doubt I could tell the difference between SMSL’s D1se2 and their 1611 F. (I’m going off of memory compared to the SMSL running into my 101s, which isn’t a direct comparison.) I ended up buying a Laiv recently and it sounds good, works with how I use my system and isn’t a furnace. Digital audio has come quite a ways from the ’high-end’ soundcards everyone was happily running.

This my be the most logical explanation of why all DACs don't sound the same and why chasing the best measurements doesn't produce the best sound quality.

The most "logical" explanation is one that takes science into account and tells you that sighted evaluations by the designer and reviewer have no value especially at these low levels of detail.

Fortunately Cameron is starting to learn this as you can tell from this video of his produced 5 months later than above video.  The title is clickbait as he does not at all test two different DACs but do listen to the introduction where he fully acknowledges that such testing must be blind and repeated:

I realize the OP was talking about ASR speaker measurements and I went off on DAC measurements but this post has turned into an ASR free for all.

This my be the most logical explanation of why all DACs don't sound the same and why chasing the best measurements doesn't produce the best sound quality.

@ghasley @nonoise +1  It's outta here!

@pynkfloydd Was it Bruce Brisson who developed the first Monster ICs the M300? That was the best cable for the price although it had soft, rolled off highs and limited resolution but it had a smooth, warm mid-range. Today, a comparable inflation adjusted cable that is extremely superior is Bedlen/Blue Jeans ICs (well, the XLRs). I use their XSRs in a $200,000+ system.

I heard 3 levels of Transparent speaker/system cable at an LA Show where the more expensive the system (up to $750K), the more awful the sound. Don’t even mention High Fidelity cabling with those horrible giant in-line magnets.

As to the Topping DACs, I’ve now heard 5, mostly early ones with the super high resolution but poor musical sound. The Topping D70s turns out to be their best. My best friend uses it in a modest priced system anchored by Von Schweikert VR35 export speakers. In my system with Lampizator Poseidon DAC/pre-amp which is $25K, the Poseidon is NOT 50X better than the Topping. Maybe 30% to 50%. I paid more as it was designed as a pre-amp and the Topping pre-amp is awful (probably just a cheap op-amp). As a DAC, this Topping is super musical osounding. It lacks the dynamic contrast, soundstage width and depth and music separation (instruments/voices) of the Poseidon but unless there is a head to head ccomparison, it’s a tremendous bargain and physically unimposing. The SOTA DAC costs much more than a superb one. I also own a (near or actual) SOTA CD transport in the Jay’s Audio CDt3 Mk3. For $5K, it is 5X to 10X less expensive than exotic French and Swiss transports or even upper cost Esoteric units.

As to phono cartridges, most of my friends use Dynavector or have multiple arms/cartridges. I have multiple tables for 78s and microgroove so I use a less expensive, less resolving 20X2 L with a SUT costing 3X, table at 7X and arm at 4X the cartridge price . The reason is it is a nearly universal LP transcriber. I own 31,100 LPs from 1950 mono to 200 45 rpm recuts. This relatively inexpensive cartridge provides great sound although not SOTA for the best mastered modern stereo LPs and great sound for my older, noisier vinyl 1950s mono LPs.

Just my two cents at this point of this mostly Amir/ASR discussion. Since my original forum, Amir began posting on Oct 16, 2022, now up to 754. He spends an inordinate amount of time on ONLY Audiogon forums involving ASR. I have 1,934 posts in 23 years from 2001. 3X the posts in 10X more years. He is OBSSESSED with a few recent forums. (I did learn from many forums I participated in, not like Amir who apparently learns nothing and knows it all).

@ghasley 

All the best,
Nonoise

Oops.  I misspoke.  It was the Transparent OPUS cable ($46000), not MIT.  Here is the link.

"And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up."

And there were four total listeners, not three.

@amir_asr - Thank you.  I couldn't find a reference to the exact model of Monster cables, but there's a mention of a $1.2k price point.  Most likely they may have been the M2.x series or Sigma Retro Gold, which are both thick copper wires with gold terminations.  Frankly, this doesn't surprise me as they're comparable, aside from price and a carbon fiber 'vibration dampener.' 

This may be shocking to some, but when I lived in a tiny studio apartment in NYC, I experimented with alternatives and ordered Mil-Spec wire meant for spacecraft (silver coated copper in teflon) and appliance wire (12 gauge solid core copper).  I ended using the appliance wire with excellent results, although it was an absolute pain to work and didn't look too pleasant.  That said, I do enjoy fancy-looking cables and silver solid core for analog signals.

I do think there's some degree of truth to the marketing claims, but they're usually misunderstood and overblown.  For example, the recent trend of using gold wires as speaker cables (where gold is preferable for applications where corrosion is a concern, but poorer conductor than copper) or Rhodium plating everything.

When you set the filter to "off," the output level jumps up by some 4 dB.  This easily results in better perceived detail, air, etc.  This is why it is critical to match levels in such listening test comparisons. 

Failing that, you want to pay attention to measurements as it not only tells you about higher volume, it also shows that "off" starts to cut off the output starting from just 5 kHz.  There is a whopping 4.5 dB droop by the time you get to 20 kHz! If you had matched levels, you would have hopefully heard the much attenuated high frequency response.  Granted, some confuse this with "less digital" which it is not.

I should clarify that I was getting the odd tweeter cut-out across all filters and even when volume was set at -3.0 dB.  Admittedly, I don't measure as often as I should, but I think there may have been have been something else at play and possibly some conflict with my speakers' high pass filter and the D1se2's drop off in the higher frequencies.  I did cross reference frequency response to troubleshoot and it did go away once volume was set less than -5.0dB.  I also get what you're saying and the boost to the more pleasant frequencies may have worked well with my preferences and/or speakers.  Overall, it's a great entry into DACs and would recommend.  (I picked it up on eBay for $300 and tested in my MBL system with excellent results.)

I guess my point was that measurements are a good baseline, but listening and testing play an often enjoyable, sometimes frustrating role in the hobby.  My layperson observation is that people often take measurements as absolutes without diagnosing their own issues within their circuit.

Isn't this similar to audiophile marketing half-truths?  I do, however, value the idea of teaching people to think and make their own judgement calls.

I can imagine the emergence of AI has vastly improved the sex lives of the ASR bunch.

"

I didn’t say that your listening wasn’t valid, I provided others overall assessments .

Sure looked like you were posting the three other reports to do exactly that.

Just because you don’t agree with how they provided their reports doesn’t make their comments invalid.

Then you must also agree with this from Jason:

"Having already discovered how some of the hotel’s huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker’s true character, the speaker’s character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) "

So he heard extra resonances, and overemphasis of lower midrange and upper bass. Right? The three other show reports posted made zero mention of any faults let alone these.

What you quoted from me was this:

"Boomy and tuby. But large presentation."

"Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong.""

Jason said similar thing with "upper bass" having problems. He praised the large presentation which I also mentioned as a positive."

You seem to have this view that yours is the only word in audio, posting others comments to give balance is something you apparently can’t tolerate. Oh well!

Relative to Jason’s comments I didn’t state that he wasn’t in agreement with you, I did question your letting slide his comments about speaker break-in being a possible cause since you so adamantly say it doesn’t exist.

But hey, as you noted in one of your posts they are just dammed show reports and shouldn’t be taken seriously, including yours. Given that, maybe you shouldn’t use yours to try to prove a point.

Anyway, I’m done. Listening to music via a tube integrated, sounds damm good!

You'll fix modal nulls with parametric EQ dude? Wow.

Automatic EQ systems do that by using a trick that relies on how much headroom  your speakers/amp have.  You pull the overall level down to the minimum of nulls (within reason).  You then use PEQ with negative gain to fix the peaks.  Result is flat response (or close to it).

Keep in mind that no true null exists in a room due to lossy nature of it.  So we are not dealing with an impossible problem.

Fortunately you don't need to fix them fully or much.  Nulls do not cause ringing in time domain so their sonic impact is much lower than peaks.  Fixing 2 to 3 peaks will make a massive difference.

All rooms have bass modes ("resonances" as Jason may be saying) that must be corrected. This requires parametric equalization. Without it, it is only a matter of

You'll fix modal nulls with parametric EQ dude? Wow.

Another thing I found interesting is the ASR recommended PCM filter is Linear Fast.  If you go on ASR or elsewhere, people will blindly recommend this setting, simply because of Amir's reviews.  I found two things through my own testing...  First, I was getting a speaker pop from the DAC cutting off highs when leaving the DAC on 0.0 dB, so I had to turn down the volume before turning off the volume setting.  Second, Filter Off actually sounds best to me in my system, despite this being the setting that's not recommend.

This is trivially explained through measurements.  See this measurement form my VMV D1se2 Stereo DAC Review:

When you set the filter to "off," the output level jumps up by some 4 dB.  This easily results in better perceived detail, air, etc.  This is why it is critical to match levels in such listening test comparisons. 

Failing that, you want to pay attention to measurements as it not only tells you about higher volume, it also shows that "off" starts to cut off the output starting from just 5 kHz.  There is a whopping 4.5 dB droop by the time you get to 20 kHz! If you had matched levels, you would have hopefully heard the much attenuated high frequency response.  Granted, some confuse this with "less digital" which it is not.

I didn’t say that your listening wasn’t valid, I provided others overall assessments .

Sure looked like you were posting the three other reports to do exactly that.

Just because you don’t agree with how they provided their reports doesn’t make their comments invalid. 

Then you must also agree with this from Jason:

"Having already discovered how some of the hotel's huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker's true character, the speaker's character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) "

So he heard extra resonances, and overemphasis of lower midrange and upper bass.  Right?  The three other show reports posted made zero mention of any faults let alone these.

What you quoted from me was this:

"Boomy and tuby. But large presentation."

"Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong.""

Jason said similar thing with "upper bass" having problems.  He praised the large presentation which I also mentioned as a positive.

By the way, it is a given, per fundamental physics and laws of the Universe that the bass in that room is wrong.  It has to do due to wave superposition.  All rooms have bass modes ("resonances" as Jason may be saying) that must be corrected.  This requires parametric equalization.  Without it, it is only a matter of what music you play (that hits on room modes), where you are listening, and your hearing acuity to detect this problem.

Above applies to any system regardless of cost.  You could have a $10M speaker system and it will still produce the wrong bass because that is a property of the room, not the speaker.

Those of you who are spending thousands on speaker wire but don't use DSP, have completely missed the boat on what it takes to have a high-fidelity system.  For $100 you could measure your room and apply the correction to get good sound.  Instead, you are admiring the cost of your system, not its true fidelity.

Amir only wants to answer what he wants to answer. 

Naturally.  There is one of me and many posting audiophile nonsense.

He will defer and ignore anything else and post a bunch of graphs and babble. 

Nope.  I answered you with text.  That there is no such thing as fast or slow bass, microdynamics, etc.  I said that these are made up terms so naturally there is no measurement that matches them.  It is like saying some speaker sounds like a Donkey and asking me for a measurement for that!

 perused his site a bit and in one blurb about listening to a Dac on his headphones he marveled at the amazing dynamics!

Yes and I explained to you that this term is short hand for dynamic range and how deep the bass goes.  You disagreed and demanded to know if "Cornwall has better Macro dynamics than a Harbeth ."  I post if anyone agrees with you and no one did.  So you need to argue with the folks here, not me.  I have addressed your question and there is nothing else I can tell you.

Amir only wants to answer what he wants to answer. He will defer and ignore anything else and post a bunch of graphs and babble. I perused his site a bit and in one blurb about listening to a Dac on his headphones he marveled at the amazing dynamics! However here he says dynamics don’t exist and ignores the request to answer how that is measured. Nope sorry said dynamics are how loud it can play… musta been blaring his ears out I guess.. Hmm. 

@facten "Why would you do that?". Challenging the Enlightened, unacceptable!

This whole picture of ASR is freaking unbelievable.

Because yours isn't the only perspective that people should read; it's called balance

I didn’t say that your listening wasn’t valid, I provided others overall assessments . 

Why would you do that?

I didn’t say that your listening wasn’t valid, I provided others overall assessments . Just because you don’t agree with how they provided their reports doesn’t make their comments invalid. And, yes Jason did state concerns about their fidelity, I noted that; likewise his overall assessment tends to be inline with the others but go ahead and ignore that.

Maybe you should reach out to him about his apparent ignorance on speaker break-in eh

It would have seemed that you would have discounted his assessment since they don't follow your science

I do.  That's why I highlighted the part that said "it is a damn show report."  Anyone who takes these seriously doesn't know which end is up.  And that applies to my show reports as well.  But at least with mine, you learn what music was played and discover new music to enjoy.  This is one of the reasons I go to audio shows.  And the other is to meet key people in these companies and have in-depth discussions with them.

The other take away is that subjectivism leads to you many answers to the same question.  They can't all possibly be true.  Jason thought there were issues with the fidelity as did I.  You quoted three others that said there was nothing wrong.  What possible value is there in such "listening?"  And why do you keep asking me to "listen" when at first chance,  you dismiss my listening tests as not valid?

""As Robert says, it’s a damn show report. If you only want to read censored news, news that’s in accord with your preferences, or reviews that are bought by audio companies, your choices are plentiful."

So are you implying that the 4 other reviewers were bought because they didn’t specifically opine on the bass?

The rest of Jason’s comments seem inline with their overall take. "But beyond that, the soundstage was huge, depth was impressive, and low bass lines were as fleshed out as can be."

Also, it’s a bit curious that you align yourself with Jason since he attributed his "concern" about the lower midrange upper bass  at least in part to speaker break-in

"The reason is simple. Because the pair of M6s on display had just arrived from Denmark via the Chicago area—this huge speaker requires up to 500 hours of break-in before it sounds its best—they only had 100–150 hours on them."

This is diametrically opposed to your position on speaker break-in . Per your opening statement on ASR thread - Do Audio Speakers Break In 3/6/2020

"Manufacturers either genuinely believe in the speaker break-in myth, repeating what they have falsely concluded like audiophiles. Or are hoping that if you don’t like the speaker at first, you hang on to it longer to lose the motivation or option to return them later. Either way, there is no reason to listen to them unless they provide objective proof that sound changes with break-in. After all, this is no small difference so surely they can measure and provide proof.... Now that I have saved you a ton of money from myth of speaker burn-in, how about donating some of that to me so I can run more of these tests".

It would have seemed that you would have discounted his assessment since they don’t follow your science

I’m thinking if someone can’t post a picture that is oriented correctly I probably don't need them sharing their insights into high fidelity music reproduction.

Could we apply the same to someone who doesn't know how to click on the image and see it in full size and proper orientation?  And with it learn that this forum software is ignoring the metadata that tells it the orientation of the image?

For example, AVSforum hits close to 8 million some months and threw the feral ASR minion manager out on the road (banned his hiney into oblivion).

Ah, you made me look:

Looks like you didn’t realize that the 8M visitors for AVSForum is for three months, not one. Using the same 3 month period, ASR Forum is doing 6.4M biting at their heels. Never had such aspiration for growth but it is rewarding to see how much audiophiles are tired of nonsense they read about hi-fi and want sources of reliable data and true explanation of how their systems work and can be improved.

From his link to his review on the sound of 2 different tracks

"Boomy and tuby. But large presentation."

"Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong."

The following don’t specify tracks just provide overall impressions

That should have been a warning to you.  You always want to know what track was being listened to so that you can see if there are issues in the music itself.  

This system costs almost $2,000,000.  Folks who have only heard $10K speaker cords in their systems are liable to be impressed just by the cost and scale of the system.  Those of us used to listening to such expensive systems can easily put that aside and provide 1000% reliable listening test results.  To wit, let's bring in Jason Serinus of stereophile into the ring. 

"It's rare that I encourage people to take my show reports with a grain of salt, but in this case, a dip in the Great Salt Lake, imperiled as it may be, seems in order. The reason is simple. Because the pair of M6s on display had just arrived from Denmark via the Chicago area—this huge speaker requires up to 500 hours of break-in before it sounds its best—they only had 100–150 hours on them. Having already discovered how some of the hotel's huge rooms tended to overemphasize the lower midrange and upper bass, I have no idea if the over-emphasis and extra resonance I heard in that region reflected the speaker's true character, the speaker's character in the early stages of break-in, room interactions, or a combination of all three. (I expect the latter.) But beyond that, the soundstage was huge, depth was impressive, and low bass lines were as fleshed out as can be."

Pretty good match for my assessment and he did it without noticing lack of cable lifters!!!

In the comments, he says this:

"As Robert says, it's a damn show report. If you only want to read censored news, news that's in accord with your preferences, or reviews that are bought by audio companies, your choices are plentiful."

Regarding the Borreson Room at PAF 2023:

From Amir’s post above which I take as a mixture of sarcasm, but maybe it's not

"The whole system sounded poor because as you see, no cable lifters were used. Electrons were looping needlessly and escaping onto the floor, the rack, etc. This muddied all the detail as there were no micro-dynamics to speak of. Soundstage was poor as well due to crosstalk between those cables."

From his link to his review on the sound of 2 different tracks

"Boomy and tuby. But large presentation."

"Central vocal image nice; bass still sounded wrong."

The following don’t specify tracks just provide overall impressions

Positive Feedback:

"A remarkable sounding room featuring Ansuz, Aavik, Borresen, and Axxess. Crazy good."

Part Time Audiophile:

"Børresen M6 were playing music in a HUGE way. In comparison to the M3s, the M6s walked up to the rear wall of the exhibit room and kicked it over like it was a backdrop in a movie... to call the Børresen M6s a Friday highlight of the show is a massive understatement."

Archimago’s Musings :

"No need to beat around the bush with this one. The Børresen M6 speaker with accompanying Aavik gear, all part of Audio Group Denmark, was a joy to listen to for this high-fidelity-loving audiophile

Enjoy the Music:

"To say it sounded amazing would be an understatement....

the sonics were jaw-dropping, with the music emanating from the darkest, densest, quietest background you can imagine. Speed and impact were world-class, and it offered an unworldly degree of resolution, supporting its exquisite transparency."

Blasphemers!!

Did the bad man go away? Did he think his followers would look into that open baffle speaker?

All the best,
Nonoise

Well sure, when you get banned, what better thing to do than start Audio Science Fiction Review? We saw the same thing with Romy the Cat and Good Sound Club. 

For someone who claims to have 2,000,000 visitors a month to ASR, Amir seems to have a lot of time and energy to devote to repeated postings in this thread on Audiogon. Somehow it does not add up, but he keeps coming back and arguing every point. He is always right, and always has the last word until somebody else tries to. It reminds me of the Eveready Bunny on Duracell batteries that just won’t stop.

For example, AVSforum hits close to 8 million some months and threw the feral ASR minion manager out on the road (banned his hiney into oblivion).

Agon hits around 1.5 million some months.

no big deal...

I know what Joey did to the Tektons.

For someone who claims to have 2,000,000 visitors a month to ASR, Amir seems to have a lot of time and energy to devote to repeated postings in this thread on Audiogon.  Somehow it does not add up, but he keeps coming back and arguing every point.  He is always right, and always has the last word until somebody else tries to.  It reminds me of the Eveready Bunny on Duracell batteries that just won't stop.

How 'bout this from a guy who uses measurements as an aid and not a template? He even uses a Doge tube amp for crying out loud and just listen to the sound he gets. The measurements bear out what his instincts tell him and not the other way 'round. 

The first part deals with his thoughts about his system followed by various music samples. You can skim the music if you like and start at 21:09 for his measurements and a look into his system.

All the best,
Nonoise

@textbychoice

"Both shocked and disappointed the Moderators have allowed Amir to turn this thread into nothing more than a display of chest thumping ego promotion of ASR."
Yes, and when  we comment on the fact that minion man hijacked this thread, one's post gets removed.

More foolishness from the fool of fools.....who will not listen....just makes fun of those that listen.....sad....very sad.  However, I am happy....for life is beautiful.  Will be doubling up wire on my woofers tomorrow....IT WILL make a difference.....everything does.  Happy listening everyone!

I’m thinking if someone can’t post a picture that is oriented correctly I probably don't need them sharing their insights into high fidelity music reproduction.

Although I have never had a speaker cable in any of my systems over $ 10K.

Sounds like you haven't elevated from mid-fi systems.  From my show report of Pacific Audio Fest, the Børresen room had the Ansuz D-TC Gold signature which costs $108K.

The whole system sounded poor because as you see, no cable lifters were used.  Electrons were looping needlessly and escaping onto the floor, the rack, etc.  This muddied all the detail as there were no micro-dynamics to speak of.  Soundstage was poor as well due to crosstalk between those cables.

You have Amir posting one Double blind test that went "his way" and somehow that justifies his point of view. On the other hand, you have maybe a hundred people around the world that are A/Bing cables right this very minute and find they are different.....let alone the thousands and thousands of posts all over the net. But, they are not following Amir’s listening test rules so all their observed and heard findings are null and void.....Basically, they have all fooled themselves in thinking they hear differences......so he is calling them all fools.

So, who is the fool here? The one who makes up stuff that cannot be proved and does no listening tests? Or the 200,000 people around the world that do listening tests and hear differences? I hope you all use your ears to decide and not your ego mind.

You cannot KNOW what something sounds like without LISTENING. Just like you cannot know what something looks like without looking.....tasting, smelling, touching, etc. This is not a mind game.....this is direct knowledge....to know something with our senses is the highest science....the highest. Praise be to our senses. We can trust what we hear......we can.

Well, at least he's now using subscriber numbers as opposed to visitor numbers. It's like someone turned off the bullhorn.

Amir_asr, thank you I stand corrected on that point. I'll let the rest stand.

Notice not one word about the sound of Mike's system, just that he couldnt tell the difference in cables. Plus this is just one enthusiast who may have been able to tell the difference if he werent in an adverse situation in which he knew he was being tested. Notice he (that guy) keeps mentioning JA from Stereophile but doesnt mention that JA isnt a fan of double blinds. 

"Using our testing methodology". HMMMM. 

For the record I have never been a fan of Transparent cables. If memory serves the big deal has something to do with reducing or eliminating the vibration of the conductor or was this MIT? Anything but transparent with the less expensive cables from my experience. So not what I would pick as a viable representative of higher priced cables. Although I have never had a speaker cable in any of my systems over $ 10K.