Let you ears be the judge.On what you like .Your the one who will be listening most of the time....Enjoy.
Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
307 responses Add your response
I find useful info on ASR all the time including just now. Task: use Roon DSP to tweak a pair of Polk Atrium 4 outdoor speakers . 1. Did not measure well on ASR 2. The review indicated a treble bump and bass rolloff at about 100 hz. Good info! 3. The review indicated he liked the sound better than expected after measured but could not recommend. 5. Where my speakers are mounted is not uncommon. Listening is never on axis so treble bump is actually a good thing and not a problem. |
@seanheis1 I look forward to having the time, energy, space and money... Having said that, my experience is that mid-woofers are funny to work with, and I'd have to see actual far field measurements before I took the simulations at face value. I leave the overall value and accuracy of Klippel tools up to others who really care to debate. Also, quasi-anechoic means anything besides an anechoic measurement. Taking a thousand measurements and having advanced room simulation tools is not "fully anechoic." It’s a simulated anechoic measurement, and that’s exactly how I define quasi-anechoic. I am happy to learn that Klippel is a much more advanced quasi-anechoic system than I thought. That’s great. Still quasi. 😀 Best,
Erik |
We dont lack fanatics in the world right now and in audio threads too...On each side. I am here and enjoy but i dont take " the upgrade urge to high end and high cost motto" seriously at all and i can use ASR if needed ( not their tools ideology though) .😊 i think we must create an acoustics audio thread ...The only audio site with the real science of hearing because if you dont know it yet acoustics is not about room panels .. Then we will not be bothered anymore by gear taste marketing snobs nor by tools electrical measures fanatics... 😁
|
Klippel is actually better than anechoic. For example, at the NRC the chamber is only good to around 80hz....it's just too small. I don't think you will see new anechoic chambers being built due to Klippel...Klippel is full range and it's just better...more practical, faster, incredibly accurate. Even the best anechoic chambers are like that little bookshelf speaker that is rolled off at 80hz 😃 |
I’m not arguing this at all. I’m just saying that, by definition, it’s quasi. :) The results may be better than anechoic, but the measurements are considered quasi. We are estimating an anechoic response even though the measurements themselves were not done in an anechoic environment. Fortunately for low frequencies we have ground plane measurements, which I believe are actually anechoic... but I’ll leave that to the scientists to debate. :-) I’m really glad we have all the modern tools for speaker measurement and design, certainly nice to see them trickle down to being affordable for DIY enthusiasts. |
8th-note; I really like your response here. And Mapman you make some great points also. I think when we see speaker auditions we all take it with a grain of salt when it comes to a reviewer stating their listening experience. But even the best review magazines put their products on the pedestal under some type of measurement. As all these posts have proven people come into this subject with their own predispositions -- like MOST of these posts. I can't afford the high end gear and when I wanted a new DAC I did a ton of research -- and Amir's analysis of a Gustard X16 sealed the deal for me and I loved the product. I have upgraded the interconnects as money permits and the sound gets better all the time. As we all know once you start buying components from multiple companies the only way to ensure a major mismatch is to shoot for neutrality. But in the same vein I've had a neutral system that sounded degraded on 89% of commercial music. So adding our own colorations to suit our tate has a place here. Like tubes and SS there will always be 2 camps.
|
@amir_asr I see you've been a member here for a couple years. I would be very interested in seeing your home system. Please take some time to post pictures and a list of equipment in the virtual system section of the site. I have asked all members to post their system in the past. I think we all enjoy seeing and learning from how other members have set up a system. IMHO. Cheers. |
I’m not arguing this at all. I’m just saying that, by definition, it’s quasi. :) The results may be better than anechoic, but the measurements are considered quasi. We are estimating an anechoic response even though the measurements themselves were not done in an anechoic environment. Nope. There is no "estimation" going on. Klippel NFS makes dual scans separated by fixed distance. This allows it to then detect the direct sound vs reflected sound due to phase differential. The reflections are then filtered computationally. This is what makes it superior to anechoic chambers which lose that characteristics at lower frequencies. There is nothing "pseudo" about that. Gated measurements are called "pseudo" because they lack low frequency resolution. That makes them an estimate that is good at mid to high frequencies but not bass. Klippel NFS solves this problem (and with higher SNR to boot). "Fortunately for low frequencies we have ground plane measurements, which I believe are actually anechoic... but I’ll leave that to the scientists to debate. :-)" Ground plane measurements have sources of error. And require stitching to the gated measurements which again, can introduce errors. To be sure, you can get really good results with ground plane+gated measurements but it is very tedious. See this post from our resident expert in that field:
|
The fundamental problem with ASR and the like is that they believe everything that is meaningful regarding sound reproduction can be measured. In fact, the opposite is mostly true. Most things that can be heard to sound different (and judged to be better by everyone in the room) CANNOT be measured. Here is a list of things that cannot be measured; 1. Wire......all brands and types and whether is is cryoed and which direction you use it in......all SOUND different. Thousands of posts worldwide attesting to this. 2. Resistors.......all brands of resistors and types all sound different....even if they are the same inductance and general material. For instance, I ABed four different tiny surface mount resistors that were using the same material and all were the same size......all sounded different from each other. 3. Capacitors......right now a lot of people all over the world are upgrading their caps in their preamp, amp and speakers. Tons of posts about this all over the net. 4. Connectors.....yes, they all sound different. The guy at Qualio audio stated that the WBT nextgens were the ones for his speakers. 5. Solder......yes, all brands of solder sound different. I did straight wire bypass tests on 5 different types of solder in the early 80s. The reference was 5 inch pieces of wire and then we would solder 5 solder joints onto another piece of the same wire and A/B with the wire without solder joints.....none of the brands of solder passed the test. We chose this custom silver solder as the best and ordered a bunch but 6 months later that latest Wonder Solder was better..... 6. All cables sound different.....interconnect, digital cables, HDMI cables, ethernet cables, power cables, and speaker cables......the best connector is NONE....hard wire whenever possible. 7. Footers and stands all sound different. 8. Getting cables off the floor improves sound. 9. infinity.....everything sounds different.....he he. Practically nothing above can be measured.....but it all CAN be heard. The die hard believers in the opposite of what I just stated will never listen to find out whether what I just stated is true or not. Here is a story that illustrates this: 3 buddies were invited over to someones house who owned modified Soundlabs speaker and a super front end. One of the 3 was someone who believed that amps sound different but not interconnects......he brough his new buddy who was new to audio and had told this newby about his point of view about wire. One of the other guys brought this cable (remember the peanut butter and jelly cable by Kimber?) to A/B with my friends super litz cable that he got the idea of in a dream. When they went to A/B the cables the non believer went into the kitchen so he would not have to be in the room. Of course, he could hear the sound from the kitchen and hear their commentary. All three in the room heard the same differences (quite marked). After they were done the non believer pulled his head our the the sand and rejoined them. They did even bother trying to talk to him about what they heard for they knew he was stubborn. If he would have stayed in the room and heard the difference he would have been WRONG for all those years. And if he stayed and then stated that they both sounded the same then he would have been given the stare by them......meaning...Are you deaf? They would never trust what he says again. Of course, the ego cannot handle those two scenarios......so best just to avoid listening. This is what is going on in the objectivist camp.....they just keep stating the same things over and over and then go onto forums where 90% believe otherwise and point fingrers. Of course, they kick off their forum anyone who looks like the enemy.....they kicked me off. Once they saw that I sell and promote things that cannot be measured they started calling me a thief and con man........and we don’t want thiefs and conmen on our forum now, do we. They claim that I pray on the gullible.......what a laugh. I sell my inexpensive tweaks with a 30 day money back quarantee and everyone likes them......must be a lot of fools out there.....I mean, you cannot trust your own hearing. Who is more gullible? The people that try things in their own homes and decide for themselves or a bunch of followers of a cult that professes to have all the answers? It certainly is simpler and cheaper to be an objectivist.....heck you just need any old source, a $700 preamp....a $700 DAC a $1000 amp, $1 a foot cables and whatever cheap speakers that measure flat and can handle power and you are good to go. If the latest DAC measures slightly better then you could or could not "upgrade".....since there really is no upgrading because what you have now is perfect. Yes, indeed a gullible illusion. REAL SCIENTISTS actually try things. The best INSTRUMENT for measuring sound reality is your EARS. However, you must have your heart and mind open to begin down the road of true knowledge.....If you live in your righteous ego based mind....you will never know the truth. What I just stated is not going to convince anyone to shift their position. As long as the ego remains the supreme ruler we will never agree......the ego likes separation and fighting. The heart loves unity and oneness. I love everyone.....no matter what your silly mind thinks......and I know your soul.....in every one of you....loves me. Kisses and Hugs for everyone......forever. You are all infinitly beautfful. |
I think it is pretty predictable that the invective that springs forth from the ASR community/cult, has spread as negativity always does. And it all comes from Amir. He is the leader and he justifies it. Just look at his image on the ASR site. A Geisha with a sneer. His intent is pretty clear with that alone. And his followers are not reasonable. They are aggressive to the extreme. That's the product of his leadership. This one sided reliance on measurement and the tendency to use those judgements to harm businesses by crying foul or fraud. I have to wonder how many honest audio entrepreneurs his group has damaged. It has to be extremely difficult to eke out success in this hobby. Not every product will shine brightest, but there has always been many paths to audio bliss. In this way, ASR has hurt all audiophiles. Because in the end, many of those paths will be lost forever. |
I think you are giving him to much power. Most people see through their game and I doubt that he has put anyone out of business. Hopefully we learn not to repeat bad behavior or thinking. If we resist him seriously then he gets stronger. For whatever you resist.....persists. We are the creators here. If we want to create a loving and intelligent world then we need to act loving and intelligent. Making him an enemy or putting him down is not intelligent. Whatever you put you mind on.....you become. Allow him to be just he way he is. He is beautiful and in time he will realize this more and more. This is of course true for all of us. Concentrate on the positive. Be happy. Be of service to everyone.......just don’t give energy/attention to those that are not in the greatest service. Don’t be a fighter/critic.....be a beacon of light. Just state your truth and let it go. We are all bozos on the bus. We are all learning. Let him have his playground......and let us play in our own playground.......one that is filled with infinite possibilities. BTW, basic speaker measurements are super important. If you do not have a calibrated mic and some good software......HUH?.....why not? (very inexpensive). Speaker frequency response measurements in your room are highly informative. Especially direct sound readings. Having super off axis response is great for group listening or listening on the side of the room.......but in the hot seat (which always sounds the best even with a super great dispersion speaker)...what you hear is mostly what the mic says. If you stand up and don’t like the sound.....but never listen that way.....they why would you care. If you want sound that is great from all points in the room (standing, sitting. way off to the side) then you need a super dispersion speaker. Me, I sit in one spot.....that is where I measure. And when I measure reasonably flat response......that is how it sounds. Most all preamps, DACs and amps measure flat frequency response......so their measurements mean very little. When Danny Richie gets in a speaker to mod the first thing he does in measure the frequency response......then he tweaks it. It is incredible how many speakers he gets in that do not measure well and his fixes are very, very simple. Almost anyone can do what Danny does. You measure and you get one of the free xover programs out there and go to town.......the program does most the the work by telling you what values to use and how to make it flat. You then put the components in and re-measure and fine tune. This is not rocket science......There is no reason a manufacturer should make a speaker that has crazy bad response......no reason. Does not need to happen in todays world.....Crossover design is mostly a science......of course, the parts you use and the execution all change the sound......but flat frequency response is easy as pie in todays world |
Amir Derangement Syndrome. Seems to be a popular business model these days. But I do believe he is sincere. As is the EARmir side. (why is ear always capped?) Btw we listen with our brains. Neurons firing stimulating memories, emotions, current...past. Not to mention new pathways always in play. As to all cables sound different that is a stretch. Maybe in an Uber expensive system or some amazing ears, but having a hard time with that objective/subjective statement. One more observation. Have their ever been products sold with excessive puffery with no attempt at real improvement of sound? All manufacturers are pure in heart and excellent marketing is all in all. There has to be a line, amorphous yes, but there has to be some threshold besides my ears told you so. |
Audio products are sold with puffery because...sales. Or they are sold with measurements because...sales. Music is emotional. Gear is beautiful and represents many different things to different people. If the product isn't moved, the industry dies.
@ricevs Naive |
I may need to clarify something. When I say that the Klippel results are quasi-anechoic I’m not arguing that "quasi-anechoic" is bad, but that by definition it means measurements with anything other than an anechoic space. I made the mistake ot descrbing a specific quasi-anechoic measurement technique, and it may seem I’m saying that quasi anechoic is 1 specific process. It isn’t. It’s an adjective. It classifies measurements broadly into 2 categories: anechoic or not based on the measurement methods. Regardless of the post processing methods, Klippel or otherwise, unless the measurements were donoe in an anechoic space they must then be "quasi-anechoic." if they attempt to replicate an anechoic measurement. The Klippel system may in fact be the best we can do today. It may be the best ever. There may never be anything better. It’s still going to be quasi-anechoic in my mind. Always and forever. I never said ground plane measurements were perfect, but that they could be used for an anechoic measurement below 80 Hz, so why bother to argue that they have issues as well? I don’t care. They are still anechoic while Klippel is not. If this winds you up in a knot, I’m sorry. Have a cookie. If you think "anechoic" is better than "quasi-anechoic" that’s on you, not me. You clearly have a branding problem you want to argue. If your entire web presence now hangs on the perceived value of the brand Klippel, that’s not my concern either. Klippel doesn't care what I think of it and vice-versa. So if you want to argue that there are pros and cons of any kind of measurement, sure, go ahead, but please don’t expect me to engage in arguments I didn’t make. |
Measurements are extremely important, without the equations made prior to the measuring process, there would not be much on offer as a Audio Equipment. The user of Audio Equipment are in general uninterested in the equations and the measurements that follow. Their Trust is in the designs on offer to satisfy their needs as a Listener to a produced sound. In relation to a Speaker, is not the owner of the Speaker at any price point keen to know the Watts (Power Handling), dB (Efficiency), Ohms (Impedance), Hz (Frequency Response). These are the measurements available for most speakers on offer, are there many Speaker owners who extend beyond wanting to witness a Speaker of Interest be analysed for its measurements, or is the next stage the want to experience the Speaker in the Flesh for it s aesthetic and sound produced. For most the Speaker once recognised for meeting a certain criteria, to match a Amplifier, the next stage is the impression the Speaker is able to have on them. Analytical measurements are not really going to supply information to the general speaker owner and listener of produced sound, that shows where the Speaker is possibly being stretched as a tool. Well Seasoned listeners with a broad experience may have more confidence in matching the analysis to the performance of the speaker. Across the last few years, I have been able to listen to a range of ESL and Cabinet and OB Speakers from Vintage Design to modern designs in new to myself systems and systems very familiar to myself. My ear still is very endeared to a sound produced from a Vintage Design, but the impression left by a few modern designs, especially Cabinet Designs has forced myself to have a complete rethink on where the Speaker is to go in my system in the future, until recently I thought the OB was to be the successor to the Vintage design Speakers in use, Cabinet Type Speakers are Speakers of Interest as well now. These changes in direction are solely supported by the impression formed as a result of the listening experience, not a measurement of a Cabinet Type Speaker has been known to me prior to having the experience. |
The Revel dealer’s forum had fallen off my radar (when I got the useless gist of it), until a couple of guys on my listserv mentioned they had been banned for politely disagreeing on some measurement crap, like what is audible or not...In other words, his clan is suppressing anything that deviates from the caricature he paints, in the name of ’science’. But, here he is. There are specific religions, where the land is no longer secular by law, if members of that specific religion become a majority. The lands where other religions are a majority seem to remain secular by law. You go to that intolerant land and you will have no rights, if you belong to any minority religion. But, when these intolerant fanatics come over to other secular lands (in search of fortunes or whatever), they are real Fin happy with the tolerance, secular laws and the ability to have all their rights (be themselves, speak their minds). Draw parallels as you wish between the fanatic forum and the rest of em ... |
There is actually a revolution in acoustics, where it is demonstrated that there is physical invariant perceived by ears/brain/body and selected by pitch and tone filtering, informing us of the vibrating sound source qualities... Sound qualities are transmitted by waves but are not waves themselves.Sound qualities are directly perceived meanings through waves but not reducible to waves.There is always a physical invariant behind the perception of sound,a vibrating sound source empty or full, wood or metal, with or without this or that qualities etc These facts confirmed the ecological hearing perception theory i used when debating Amir about sound perceptions superstitious use of tools . The Fourier maps are not identical with the hearing territory ...They are maps not the territory... https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html These two studies confirmed my point against him ...These studies invalidate Pythagorician theory non ecological theory about hearing ... https://neurosciencenews.com/music-body-emotion-25664/ https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2308859121 https://phys.org/news/2024-02-pythagoras-wrong-universal-musical-harmonies.html https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45812-z Amir did not understood my points at all at this time ... No scientific studies can debunk ideological propagandist...he will not understood them today it will debunk his business.. 😁 Searching for truth is not the same that building a cult or an audiophile site around ourself...So useful it could be... 😊
😊
|
I have owned a pair of Tekton Double Impact speakers for 2 years now. (Rock and Roll only) I researched and decided I would try them. There were many view points that I had read that were not favorable about Tekton, but, based upon my interactions with Eric himself on several occasions, I decided to give them a shot. Note, customer service is everything to me. He was always friendly and helpful, and never appeared to be short with me, no matter how many stupid questions I had! Note: W/O going into my entire system, which happens to be quite nice IMO, AMP is Pass x250.8 / usually listened to in class A. He always kept in contact until they were received, and verified accepted and OK. I appreciated the hand holding, my first relatively expensive speakers. To jump ahead, They are scheduled to arrive Tuesday, 4/23/24 via TForce freight, a brand new ( Expensive ) for me, a pair of Tekton Encores (special Edition) regarded as Faital Pro 12" ( 3rd pair made and shipped Ser# 5&6) the earlier pair made was destroyed while shipping to Fed Ex depot near me. Eric and his staff made every effort to keep me posted with the news. Less than a month later a special NEW pair were made and shipped, Again customer service was THERE!! I cant wait to receive and hear them. I will post after some burn in. All these comments are based on actual conversations and events. Until something changes, all I can say is that I am quite impressed as to how I have been treated. Robert Shaw TN |
I have stated in other threads and will once more state it in this thread, that there is too much focus on one element of why audio has an attraction. As sound is the important end product, as a result of the math produced to manage electronic signal transfer. Analysis of the math, which is a substantial proportion of the reviews being produced on asr and now the methodologies used by the controllers of the asr site being analytically discussed in this thread. There is a more valuable approach which could be referred to as Holistic, but there is certainly the Chemistry of the Brain to be considered. As difficult as it may be take on board, there are other factors at play that encourages an individual to bond/wedded to a particular sound, oor find a place where they feel most satisfied. The Human Brain has the Amygdala at the frontal section of the Limbic System. The Amygdala is the receiver of what is present in the environment, through the Bodies Sensory Receptors creating the Bodies response to the environment. Each individual is totally unique in their reaction to environment and the Amygdala is the first section of the Brain to process the Sensory Information, with immediate creation of a chemical signal within the Brain. It is this chemistry that is the fundamental influence on producing an individual to be unique in their reaction. It is a survival trigger and not able to be controlled prior to the chemistry being triggered. It is claimed the info passing through the Brain forming chemistry travels at 260mph and the chemical changes in the Brain occur approx' 10K- 12k per second. Quarter of the Bodies Oxygen intake fuels this vital activity for Life and Survival. Sound is very much part of the environment, and by being perceived in the local environment, becomes a factor in the effect had on the Amygdala, hence the individual exposed to the sound will have a reaction to it. Sounds effect on the Amygdala, is the dictator of whether the individual will receive stimulation to remain or remove themselves from the experience they are exposed to. No one has a influence over the initial stimulus created from the Amygdala function, even though one can rationalise, if not feeling fearful as a result of the stimulus, but discomfort is also a likely feeling created. In many many cases an individual exposed to a screech on a Chalkboard will Cup a Hand over a ear, this is not a choice made but a reaction to a stimulus. Each Individual will not have a reaction that measures to the same time taken to react, there will be variation. The sound from the Chalkboard and Sound produced as a result of an Audio System are no different, both are encountered in the local environment. The repelling of the sound, is not a choice but a reaction to stimulus created following the exposure of the sound to the Amygdala. The same can be said for the acceptance and willingness to expose oneself to enduring the Sound being encountered, it s not by choice. Beat me Up, all you like about this not so usual description, but it is with a large proportion of being accurate. How many have bought devices to produce sound, inclusive of myself, resulting from an influence on their eyes and intellect only. To be met with repelling the devoice with the influence of being exposed to the sound produced becoming part of the experience. I have a few of these behind myself. Was that a choice made or a reaction to the environment controlled by the Amygdala? |
Between the amygdala and the ears canal and the brain/body processing of sound there is a world of processing...😊 Psychoacoustics explain it... Read the many articles in my post above... The reaction of a chalk board scratch is instinctive because there is no interesting and pleasing information to retrieve in it... This does not means that all our reactions to a piece of gear will result from the subjectivity programmed history associated with our amigdala... The reason why sound please us is because sound convey meanings our brain/body recognize and create . Tio explain how sound convey meanings we must study first psychoacoustics not study first amygdala reactive history ...
then you are right here :
This reaction you spoke about is most of the times a TRAINED reaction because all sounds convey qualitative meanings.. (qualia) But this does not prove that our sound reaction is motivated first and last by our amygdala alone, it is motivated by our ears/brain/body information retrieval skills acquired in our evolutive social history with speech and music and natural sounds interaction . then what you say here is not even wrong but beside the main problem of sound meanings and recognition and appreciation :
|
In general some forms of distortion are more undesirable than others. I suppose the Amygdala has something to do with that. It’s good to understand why and how we respond the way we do (each differently to some extent). So it’s true there is more to what appeals to us in sound than low distortion, but that does not change the fact that distortion exists and it’s also a good thing to understand that as well in each case. Distortion does matter. There are several pieces to every puzzle. |
mapman you cannot understand something if you dont read about it and study few minutes.. i posted many articles above ...😊 Amygdala dont explain acoustics... my Amygdala dont explain my books choices or my musical preference nor what i detect in sound speech no more that the way i appreciate a good system in a good room . A word as amygdala explain nothing ... It is not false using it as i remark above , it is true it play a central role in our memory and emotion controls but this cannot explain sound qualities perceptive evaluation by itself alone ... |
Yes acoustics are obviously important but this thread is not about acoustics. For the record here are the things one has control over that I think matter most for good sound. 1. Good quality well engineered gear designed to work well together from source to speakers. Good quality implies gear has a good handle on distortion. Many speakers will qualify here. You choose. 2. Amplification that can get the most out of the speakers. 3. Room acoustics. You can do some treatments to help. Then after that smart application of DSP can help adjust for the rest, tailor the sound to personal preferences as needed, and help one get off the merry go round of changing gear. 4. Choose your tweaks from there. |
Unfortunately the Human is only coming to terms as a modern population that they are not in control and all influences on the individual are not from their choices. There is much much more, and survival / self preservation is one, where attractive Stimulus is the reward for putting oneself in an environment the Mind interprets as secure and safe. Ambient noise/sound are indicators to the Brain and effects the chemistry that follows. All 10K - 12K chemical reactions per second. This is not a bitter pill to swallow, it is quite liberating when willingness to accept develops. |
I’m a great admirer of Amir and the work that he does at ASR. Even if one is a subjectivist and judges everything based on their hearing alone, it’s still interesting to hear how the scientific measurements compare. It strikes me as odd that subjectivists whose favorite components get a negative ASR review become angry. They enjoy what they are listening to so why care? I have Larsen 6.2 speakers that Amir would most likely pan, but I would still appreciate hearing his opinion. I’m also very distrustful of anyone who tells me that human sensory perception is the ultimate source of knowledge (opinion, perhaps) but that is a purely philosophical issue. |
Agree with most you say @rtorchia. I haven’t seen too many “subjectivist whose favorite components get a negative review on ASR review become angry” across the various audio forums I frequent. By no means is this absolute as I’m sure this happens, but this didn’t happen in this thread when Amir contributed with his condescending and authoritative tone regarding his views between a Topping D90 and a Denafrips Terminator:
Many of us aren’t arguing the measurements. I’m arguing that Amir and ASR have a toxic culture that permeates other audio forums with condescending tones that have been normalized and promoted at ASR. |
I indicated in my one post on this thread that I was done here. I do have a few things to add. I currently am down to 24 power amplifiers (from a collection of about 100). 2 of these 24 (not my particular samples), have measured poorly and have been scrutinized over at ASR. Listening to, and through these 2, I greatly enjoy what these amplifiers bring to the table. There is not a single amplifier out there that would have a problem powering my speakers. Each of my many amplifiers, all showcase ( 1 ) a different tone, ( 2 ) a different 3D soundstage, ( 3 ) a different rhythm ( prat ), ( 4 ) a different dynamic, ( 5 ) a different ability to control the 15s in the doghouses, which includes extension, sustain, under or over damping, etc., ( 6 ) playing loudly...1 of my amps can easily clip ( a highly modified Citation 12, operating at 1wpc in Class A ). Some are airier, some are more immediate, and on and on and on. In common...they are all amazingly quiet, through the speakers...black background. I have my handful of favorites (most listened to) out of the 24, and the 2 over at ASR are in this group. So, are measurements important? I definitely think so. Am I listening to distortion? Obviously, I am. What is the outcome of this, as some have stated above, including me in my 1st post). I cannot rely on measurements, when it comes to my music system. I know this thread was started about speaker measurements, but it is what it is. It is a common thing, that communication on threads, easily takes us off course. Another thing. At 70 years old, with much experience in / with the audio field, and a lover of the music, 1st, and the gear, 2nd, I am disgusted by the amount, and increase of the hostility between members and posters. And it is getting worse, by the minute. When I started out, it was fun, fun, fun. When I listen to my system, it is fun, fun, fun. I believe wholeheartedly in modifications, and have been doing them since I was 13 years old. I remember because it was the year of my bat mitzvah, and I was running a pair of vertical Cornwall, while my dad was running a pair of AR3a. We enjoyed both systems, btw. Last thing. Besides Amir, STOP getting down on RICEVS. The man knows what he is talking about. EVERYTHING MATTERS. He shares his knowledge on here, without charging a dime, and if you do not believe in his findings....just leave it alone. The negativity here, really requires a thick skin. With a pursuit to " perfect sound " (stop deluding yourselves folks), let’s all make an effort to calm things down, and enjoy the comradery....to a passion we all have. I guess I am done now. My best, MrD. |
Toro3, I have always had very positive interactions with the knowledgeable people at ASR and never experienced condescension. Sometimes they do get impatient with those whose attitude is “Don’t confuse me with the facts, I know I’m right.” If you look around you will see people who are absolutely enraged at Amir. I bought a Topping DX 7 pro a while back on his recommendation and love if as much as my RME. On the other hand, I have enjoyed Rogue tube components he would probably dislike. In the end one has to agree with the concept “To each his own”, but I remain very grateful to ASR for sharing their perspective and greatly enjoy the site and its many knowledgeable adherents. |
@goose Ears can lie. I mean the number one hallucination is hearing. Measurements can help with expectation bias. At Axpona, this year, so many speakers were so bright - I realize it is also the environment, but it was telling how many speakers lift in the treble range. |
@botrytis Measurements are not necessarily valid either. I had a pair of Kef LS50 meta for about a year. This is an ASR favorite. I found it uninvolving. Neutral but boring. Poor Soundstage. Poor imaging. Etc. I got a set of Jean Marie Reynaud Bliss Silvers. Panned by ASR. Initially I detected some mild irregularities in the upper mids. I got used to them. But the Soundstage is broader, more dimensional, and imaging is far more precise. And I found the rhythmic aspects far more appealing. They grab me every time. ASRs Measurements paradigm was not helpful or accurate. I have had the JM Reynauds for about six months now. I added an Audio Resear VT60 to the system. Even better. |
Your ’involving’ quote is subjective not objective. That is why I say it takes both listening and measurements. What you say still does not take away from what I said. I have heard the Reynaud's and thought eww - what not my cup of tea. Just me and what I said about them is very subjective. Not everyone likes the same thing. That is why there are different speaker manufacturers. You like them great - enjoy that is all that matters. It is all about the music anyway, not equipment to me. People seem to think their way is always right. For them yes, for others no. The old saying, 'there is more than one way to skin a cat' is truer than ever. |
@botrytis Soooo, if audition two speakers. One set you love the performance of, by your listening. Then later, you go to ASR and find the "klipple" readings rate the one you did not like higher,...Which one you gonna buy? Lol
And no one is suggesting that you not believe in science. |
@prefab - I don’t go to ASR much - maybe once in a blue moon. But if a speaker is peaky, I can get headaches from listening. At AXPONA this year, so many rooms were so bright, or too much midrange, I was starting to get a headache (similar to migraines). I would walk in, I could feel it coming on, and would walk right out of the room It doesn’t happen often, but that weekend was it was happening. THAT is what I go on. Since it hasn't really been figured out since it happens maybe twice a year but when it does, nothing helps. I have to be careful what I pick. |
@botrytis I'm with you there. We all have our preferences. |
Your friend does contribute, in fact he even did me a solid once. However the skeptical in me responds everything matters when everything is for sale. There are plenty of examples where everything did not. But someone had a scheme and blind faith equaled dollars not well spent. Again the median way produces the wisest course of action. As to internet intercourse here I think it has gotten much better. Would love to have congenial Platonic dialogs but maybe that ship has sailed. |
@prefab I also never buy anything without research. I do it for it all. I have seen too many of my friends, get on the equipment treadmill. They buy on a whim and are disappointed. I have done this since I was a teenager. I was taught an educated consumer is a smart consumer. To me, audio is no difference. I hope your system gives you joy, when you listen. After all, that is what we use it for. CHEERS! |
I'm a vintage guy that enjoys vintage gear. I'm well aware of the s/n limitations of most tube amps/preamps, yet I find they present the music in a most enjoyable way, whether I'm listening to Altec 604-8G via SET, SEP, or vintage monoblocks, with the alternate system Magnepan 3.6R with tube or SS amps from 50 wpc on up. As a tech, I service and measure all of the gear that crosses my bench. On that note, I thoroughly appreciate what ASR does to cover the "measurables", even if what Amir measures is not something I can hear. Conversely, I can hear that which Amir cannot measure. And many times I've been confounded by a disconnect between measurements and hearing. For example, I had a Mc 240 on the bench. Measured very close to 50 wpc at the edge of clipping. Beautiful 10k square wave. Sounded dull and lifeless with the 3.6R. Then connected an Eico HF-89, and suddenly there was sparkle, life, slam, soundstage, and air. Yet the two amps measured nearly the same. Conclusion, measurements and listening are both useful tools. If two pieces of gear sound the same, then I'll pick the one with better measurements. I'll always pick the one with the better sound, regardless of measurements. |
Wise advice!
|
@erik_squires thanks for initiating this thread, as an amateur speaker builder I appreciate your post and thoughts. @amir_asr thanks for posting here with your responses and input - I have spent a fair bit of time on your site over the last few years and I am a member. I have been reading and posting on Audiogon forum for getting close to twenty years, and have been into audio reproduction since I could climb on a chair and operate my fathers Garrard/Fisher hifi stashed up high in the hall closet. @ricevs, @mrdecibel and @pickindoug’s comments resonate for me and I appreciate your perspectives. The reason for my increase in visits to ASR has to do with recent Internet searches on specific gear of interest taking me to the site. Repeatedly and consistently. So ASR is definitely influencing this hobby in the Internet era, and as with who lives in the biggest houses and drives the newest cars in my city, it’s helping tip the balance of power and influence in this hobby for the interested public and new generations of audiophiles from artists, musicians, designers and pretty much anyone with good listening skills to… engineers and computer algorithms. This makes me sad. If you were to spend anytime on ASR, you would gather that ears need not apply, their days and role in the hifi buying decision process are… over. No, seriously, if it can’t be measured by this or that analyzer, it can’t have value. Period. Now Amir may not say or think that, but the bulk of the discussion on his site adheres pretty closely to this line. Amir has gently poked fun at one of my posts on ASR regarding some character of sound of Schiit Mani 2 phono preamp, probably something about soundstage… while others have been extraordinarily sarcastic and blatantly dismissive of any subjective comment I might make comparing the sound attributes of say, one DAC compared to another when they both measure “perfectly”. I started my hifi habit by pouring over and being obsessed with spec sheets, and I have always measured the in-room performance of speakers I have bought or built, or when trying to integrate subs into two channel systems. I still look at measurements in reviews if available to see if a piece of gear follows sound design principles. BUT, as my understanding of how everything does matter, including the room, gear matching, vibration control and cabling, I have become really careful at testing changes to my system, retaining changes that make a difference, and rejecting those that don’t. I have found that different cables can sound different in my systems, with some cables making things better, some cables making things worse, and some having no effect. I assemble power cables from different off the self components, and some of them sound remarkably different from the others. If someone cannot not hear the difference, they are in the wrong hobby. And for me, speaker cables can affect how I perceive soundstage in my room. Different DACs also change how I perceive soundstage in my system. Sharing these subjective “findings” on ASR or other “science-based” Internet forums is met with considerable indignation, and if I persist I am accused of sealioning or worse. When I note that I have done double blind tests with digital cables that showed deeply overlapping results on the qualities of the sound produced with sighted tests they are dismissed as “poorly designed”. Some of the strongest critics are those with careers in the professional sound recording or production field who are experienced and knowledgeable, and therefore hard to dismiss. They are quite comfortable in their certainties that all modern DACs, amplifiers and cables sound the same unless they are “badly broken”, and they will cite numerous double blind tests that “prove” they are right. Pointing out that those results are not universal brings intense criticism of the individuals responsible or involved in tests that support observed differences in, say cables. It comes off as a rather passionate defense of the castle walls, and makes me wonder how good our recorded music could sound if greater care was placed on how it is recorded and with what equipment? I have decided the only way to challenge this freight train of thought is to mount some well designed listening tests that would meet the rigor suggested by Amir and others. One of the problems I see with previous group tests of gear and cables is that the subjects are not necessarily familiar with the room or the equipment, and therefore don’t have a solid baseline to judge subtle differences or changes. If multiple subjects are listening in the same room, not all of them can be located in the sweet spot, and will therefore not experience soundstage reproduction in the same way. These are logistical challenges that must be overcome to run an effective ABX/double blind test. I will not have time to take on such a task until I retire, but I am certain it can be done. In summary, I do think measurements are critically important and a great place to start your audio reproduction journey. To that end, sites like ASR provide a valuable service. I do also think there are elements of this hobby and equipment design that are both not fully quantified or measurable, yet, and where art and subjective listening add real value. My concern is that absolutist worship of measurement over listening will lead many to miss out on some of the more pleasurable elements of fun, enjoyment, and discovery this hobby has to offer. I am definitely for less arguing and more listening. kn |
