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.
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.
You can still "love" said tube amp but don't go making an argument out of it.
It doesn't bother me one bit whatsoever that you don't like certain tube amps, that's not the issue. I have a couple of friends who don't either and it's fine, there's nothing wrong with that. Some people like chocolate ice cream while others like vanilla. BUT, when you purposely trash products by "misrepresenting" them which you obviously seem to enjoy doing, then yes, it causes arguments.
You have consistently misrepresented many companies and try to act nice and rational when in fact you are just patronizing others. All that rational demeanor is a load of nonsense. You can still be rational and condescending at the same time and that's exactly what you are. I flat out don't like you and I'm not gonna candy coat it.
Look at this response from one of your members to understand what I'm saying. You don't care as long as you have your cult following.
Great review @Amir, I’m going to use this as reference to not buy valve gear…..ever!
Does that kind of response sound like you are educating others? I politely asked you if you could simply clarify my questions and you would not answer. You simply refuse to match gear properly. How do you intend to listen to a tube amplifier properly if you don't use proper speakers for them? Of course it's not that much power, because you used it with some inefficient Infinity speakers. I had to find out myself from another source because you refused to answer.
Does that kind of response sound like you are educating others?
Sure. The transistor is one of the most critical inventions there is. This site would not exit, nor the Internet without it. It drastically reduces power consumption, shrinks the sizes of components and provides incredible fidelity that no tube product ever produced. As if to try to be hip by being contrarians, some audiophiles have clung to tubes, hypnotized by the glowing filaments, convincing themselves that they are hearing better fidelity.
So here I come and show how much dirt the tube amp is throwing in the signal. And that for this privilege, you pay boatload of money to boot. Any rational person would say what you quoted. It is like building a car today with a steam engine and claiming it goes faster than a Porsche but when the data comes out that it accelerates at 1/100 of the rate, expect praise to be poured over said steam engine car!
Granted, that example was that of a better designed tube amp:
Why in the heck should anyone buy a tube amp when even a good example has this kind of noise and distortion? Again, do you not have any respect for the work of the artist and engineers and produced the content? They didn't use this amp to produce the music, right? Why do you want to serve their food in such a dirty dish?
You simply refuse to match gear properly.
Oh. That is like saying this is a great car but you better weigh less than 100 pounds to drive it! It is not my job to "match" gear when I can buy huge number of other amplifiers that don't need any matching. How would matching reduces its noise and distortion? How do you know the impedance of the amp and the impedance of the speaker to know how to match them? Answer: you do that with measurements. But again, why, oh why?
There is not one controlled listening test that shows any of these tube amps to sound better. All of the fans and companies producing tube amps have not had the wherewithal to produce just a single, ears-only test, to show that they sound better. If it is so easy to tell they sound better, why don't you produce this simple test result?
I tell you why: because you won't find the answer you are looking for. Tube amps at best have harmless distortion. At worst and in many cases, have clear audible noise and distortion. In the case of tube amplifiers, that is trivially shown as they run out of power and distortion like hell.
You want to believe in fantasies and magic? Do that. But don't tell me this picture of fidelity:
Or you could have this:
All of the above are with dead easy to drive resistive loads by the way. And at just 5 watts. These tube amps are pure noise and distortion generators. They are an insult to decades of progress in engineering to resort to them for anything other than nostalgic look.
Against my better judgement I will reply to this train-wreck of a thread.
"Amir was being honest with the measurement results he obtained. Science and its engineering applications are based on measurements."
I firmly believe this to be true. However, I also believe there are intangibles when it comes to audio and its reproduction. In other words, measurements don’t tell the whole story of how a certain piece of equipment sounds.
"OMG they gang up on Amir because he’s being truthful... what’s wrong with these people acting like bunch of "cry babies"."
Amir brings it upon himself. I find his responses to be childish insomuch that he portrays an attitude of self-righteousness and condescension towards anyone whose opinion differs than his.
My advice is to think and listen for yourself. I think you’ll hit a point in your audio journey where you realize that one guy doesn’t have all the answers. And if they tell you they do....probably time to move on.
ASR seems to me to be a place where hoards of people with cheap equipment are so desperate for validation that their $300 "insert piece of equipment here" is just as good as a $6000 "insert piece of equipment here" (that they’ve never heard for themselves, mind you), that they’ll resort to personal attacks. Amir leads the show over there and I find it rather appalling and ignorant. Not for me, thanks. If that's being a "cry-baby", well....I guess I've been called worse.
ASR seems to me to be a place where hoards of people with cheap equipment are so desperate for validation that their $300 "insert piece of equipment here" is just as good as a $6000 "insert piece of equipment here" (that they’ve never heard for themselves, mind you), that they’ll resort to personal attacks. Amir leads the show over there and I find it rather appalling and ignorant. Not for me, thanks. If that's being a "cry-baby", well....I guess I've been called worse.
This is the worst of ASR, but not the whole of it and you know, it's the internet.
Amir is being truthful? Amir is demonstrating exactly how much he doesnt understand. Certainly less distortion is a good thing but not if in order to get lower distortion you sacrifice other aspects of reproduction. Tubes give you better linearity, allow for a much simpler circuit and have better low level resolution. So they measure higher in distortion but are more satisfying and accurate in other ways which may not be measurable.
I dont care how honest a person is if they consistently demonstrate not only a lack of fundamental understanding but also a refusal to acknowledge the complexities present. The dumbing down of a complex issue simply so he can create a more defensible position does no one any favors. Amir doesnt want to help he wants to divide.
The transistor is one of the most critical inventions there is. This site would not exit, nor the Internet without it
What does this have to do with audio reproduction, I could say satellite radio wouldn’t exist without the vacuum tube, which would have a closer relationship to audio reproduction than your example.
Against my better judgement I will reply to this train-wreck of a thread.
"Amir was being honest with the measurement results he obtained. Science and its engineering applications are based on measurements."
I firmly believe this to be true. However, I also believe there are intangibles when it comes to audio and its reproduction. In other words, measurements don’t tell the whole story of how a certain piece of equipment sounds.
"OMG they gang up on Amir because he’s being truthful... what’s wrong with these people acting like bunch of "cry babies"."
Amir brings it upon himself. I find his responses to be childish insomuch that he portrays an attitude of self-righteousness and condescension towards anyone whose opinion differs than his.
My advice is to think and listen for yourself. I think you’ll hit a point in your audio journey where you realize that one guy doesn’t have all the answers. And if they tell you they do....probably time to move on.
ASR seems to me to be a place where hoards of people with cheap equipment are so desperate for validation that their $300 "insert piece of equipment here" is just as good as a $6000 "insert piece of equipment here" (that they’ve never heard for themselves, mind you), that they’ll resort to personal attacks. Amir leads the show over there and I find it rather appalling and ignorant. Not for me, thanks. If that's being a "cry-baby", well....I guess I've been called worse.
Well said and worth reposting.
Reading Amir’s multiple posts this morning, I repeatedly wondered if humility has ever crossed his mind while proofreading. The picture of himself was the cherry on top - somewhat boggling why one would share, but mildly amusing at the same time.
Why in the heck should anyone buy a tube amp when even a good example has this kind of noise and distortion?
As if to try to be hip by being contrarians, some audiophiles have clung to tubes, hypnotized by the glowing filaments, convincing themselves that they are hearing better fidelity.
This and the rest of your post merely validates my point. You're just a condescending narcissist toward others opinions that don't jive with yours about tubes and an elitist. You don't have an ounce of humility. I'm not arguing against your measurements. You can measure until you are blue in the face because that's all you've ever done.
It's you that's bothered by what others like listening to and that's why you purposely pull other peoples posts out of your own forum when they call you out on your errors. I've seen you do this time and time again in your own forum and other members have taken screen shots to prove you do this before pulling them down because they already know you will.
What do you care if others like tubes? You feel a need to show measurements as some sort of validation that listeners shouldn't like tubes? Many enjoy tubes because they are colored. You have the audacity to tell others what they should and shouldn't like because your measurements show anomalies you don't like. Oh, they must be hypnotized by those glowing filaments. Well, so what if they like that too?
I have a Klipsch The Three which you don't recommend. It sounds fine and it's fun for background listening. What? Now all the sudden I'm not supposed to like it because you did some measurements that don't jive with your ideology?
You don't have to match gear if you don't want to. That's obviously not important with your methods according to you, so I'll buy a 3 watt tube amp on amazon and run it with my Magnepan's and complain to my audience about the results. You just get some sense of superiority in your mind by trashing on companies products with your measurements without proper context.
In case you didn't know this, there are components that measure well that sound dull, boring and flat, hello? You're a real piece of work Amir.
Threads like this make me want to find a different hobby. I’ll just assume most of the angst comes from industry people who feel threatened (rightfully so) and leave it at that.
Amir is right about tube gear. Many find that out the hard way. Some end up living in bliss. That’s not to say tube gear is nothing special. Just more YMMV. Not worth arguing about. They will always be all glowy and way cool looking, which matters. But that’s just me. Some of the best sounds I have ever heard has come from very expensive tube gear. Others from SS, often for a much more modest cost.
In Amir’s defense, I bought a $80 dongle on a whim based on stellar performance reported in an Amir ASR review and that sucker lived up to the hype. It is as clean and detailed as pretty much any thing I have heard as expected based on the review findings. So there is something to what ASR does based on my personal relevant findings. I still like my much more expensive Chord Mojo, which got a much cooler review but the sound difference between the two are night and day.
There is more to the world than ASR or any one site for that matter but I have no reservations recommending the site as a source of useful information to help make wiser buying decisions.
How can he be "right" if he thinks that measurements directly correlate to sound. It has NEVER, EVER been proven. He made it up.....it is fantasy....so yes, he is wrong......and it is a lie to state what he says as fact......when it is not proven in any way. Liar, liar, pants on fire.....he he. I am sure he is a nice guy with some people......he did kick me off his forum. He is infinite spirit and totally beautiful.....but he has forgotten that truth. I hope he wakes up...this lifetime. I pray we all wake up to our inherent beauty. I love you Amir. We all love you......but, as they said is EST......."GET OFF IT!!!" Our "positions" about anything are what get us in the way of truth and love. There is only one attitude worth having.......Love and Gratitude. All other stuff in the mind is just blah, blah, blah.....including what is in my mind. We are not our mind.....we are infnite Love.....It is through the HEART that we find happiness.......The happiness that always exists (RIGHT NOW)......our very nature. We are all so blessed and loved.
I agree with what you are saying and you’re right, it’s not all wrong. I just dislike when Amir takes matters out of context to suit his own agenda and gag others who have legitimate questions or concerns in his forum. Amir even allows his own moderators to trash products they literally have not even listened to themselves just because of a measurement. If Amir had simply answered some basic questions instead of trying to evade them, I would have more respect for him. It’s a matter of principle.
I’ve even seen legitimate companies try to share an explanation regarding measurement settings just to try to constructively defend themselves and Amir will pull their posts down for questioning him. It’s awful not to allow a company to constructively and respectfully defend themselves just because one has the power to do it in their own forum. Amir reminds me of Commodus from Gladiator. It’s not humble and it’s disrespectful to hurt companies just trying to defend themselves with legitimate comments and concerns.
I have more respect for a bad guy that lets you know he’s a bad guy than a bad guy who tries to act like a good guy. They’re called wolves in sheep’s clothing. Amir’s a big boy, he can handle himself.
Amir would want us to believe that the resurgence of tube products and the associated happiness tube owner experience is based on something other than sound? No blathering about bias, coloration, nostalgia, etc can explain this. The simple fact is that many very experienced and respected audio experts and enthusiasts get from tubes something that they didnt from sold state. Designers like John Curl and Nelson Pass readily admit that they are unable to duplicate in their designs aspects of tube amp performance. They are unapologetic because they understand and have an open mind to the reality that there are things that cant be explained and are scientifically untidy. Their respective egos have been satiated by industry admiration and user respect.
This is very simplistic but I see ASR as having two sides...
The first is the review side...which is about numbers and measurements and if you participate in these threads, you better bring numbers and measurements...these are not threads for discussing feelings, preferences or theories. Nor do they attempt to do the detailed listening tests with stereo pairs in small and large rooms we would like to see in order to better correlate measurements with sound and preferences.
The second side is everything else...for example, here is a thread about what speakers people own...some own speakers that do well on the ASR tests, others do not. But no one is "attacked" and numbers aren't required. Feeling preferences and theories are ok on these threads.
And, at the end of the day, ASR calls out what they see as BS and as shoddy workmanship...who else does that? And aren't they entitled to their opinion?
I would have no objections if Amir just posted his measurements and stopped at that point. If you dont see the condescension, just in Amir's posts on this thread, you are not looking very closely.
@steve59- That's somewhat my impression also as there is a lot of faux science and shallow claims. I've tried wading through a few threads to see if I can learn something (like optimizing streaming audio quality) and it always ends with some guy saying digital audio hasn't improved since the 80s and people are wasting their time/money then a group echoes those sentiments and it's the end of the thread. I prefer diyAudio when I'm trying to actually learn or repair something technical. There's a valid reason why someone may want a statement piece strictly for aesthetic purposes, which most audiophiles understand. That said, Amir's older posts tend to encourage bad behavior, while his newer posts have called for civility more often than not. Something else to be aware of is there are plenty of people that are monetizing this mindset, with ASR having its own dealers within its forum and also the Chinese audio firms pushing products into their reviews. It's not much different than Audiogon. Anyone thinking ASR is a nonprofit strictly involved in research is very naive.
@mapman - I went down a Chinese DAC rabbit hole recently, just to see how they compare to all their chart-topping ASR measurements. The Topping D90 III was one of the worst pieces of garbage I've heard, despite being at the top of Amir's charts. Sound is rounded off and utterly flattened to where it sounds worse than my much older Sabre-based DAC on my Yamaha A8. ASR members claim all DACs sound the same --there's even a thread dedicated to it!-- and I've found this to be the opposite of truth. In fairness, the SMSL/VMV DACs aren't bad for the price, but have their own weaknesses and even ones within the line with the same ESS chip sound slightly different, which ASR does not acknowledge.
IMHO.... This thread is becoming an embarrassment and makes me want to leave Audiogon. Just a few posts back, the comment is made "Amir brings it upon himself. I find his responses to be childish insomuch that he portrays an attitude of self-righteousness and condescension towards anyone whose opinion differs from his." I suggest many members need to take a long look in the mirror. I see very little difference between Amir's adherence to what he believes and the steadfast adherence to the differing opinions held by so many Audiogon members. I neither support nor oppose Amir's position, but I do support his right to have them. All the rudeness and name calling that goes on in threads like this should be beneath us all and reflects so poorly on the community as a whole.
I suggest many members need to take a long look in the mirror. I see very little difference between Amir's adherence to what he believes and the steadfast adherence to the differing opinions held by so many Audiogon members. I neither support nor oppose Amir's position, but I do support his right to have them. All the rudeness and name calling that goes on in threads like this should be beneath us all and reflects so poorly on the community as a whole.
Anyone with a difference of opinion get banned on the fanatic's forum...KEY DIFFERENCE!
"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."
Listening tests would be very subjective and subsequent magazine/online reviews and comments would be fallacious and deceptive like one below.
"This quantum based receptacle cover make the ambient atmosphere cleaner so that harmonics shimmer into silent and the space around instruments is even more obvious"
Amir would use his test equipment to prove these claims to be false so that we wouldn't waste our money on s.o. items like this. We have too many paid trolls aka influencers (or business owners themselves or with multiple user names) writing deceptive posts on this forum just to mislead viewers. Don't you want to say something about these trolls? It seems these trolls gang up on Amir.
"ASR seems to me to be a place where hoards of people with cheap equipment are so desperate for validation that their $300 "insert piece of equipment here" is just as good as a $6000"
Of course ASR can prove that $300 equipment outperforms your $6000 SCIENTIFICALLY based on their measurements data (not based on your ears/brains) so you need to be thankful (or shameful)
Of course ASR can prove that $300 equipment outperforms your $6000 SCIENTIFICALLY based on their measurements data (not based on your ears/brains) so you need to be thankful (or shameful)
So I'm wrong if I don't like the sound of this so called great measuring inexpensive equipment and like the sound of my tube equipment? The problem with measurements is they are taken in isolation and not the way the equipment will be used in the real world.
If I’m not supposed to use my brain/ears to judge how a product sounds to me.....um.....then what’s the point?
What a ridiculous, fatally flawed premise for an argument.
My advice would be to make your own decisions based on how a product SOUNDS and what YOU like, not what some guy on the internet with a multi-meter tells you.
Audiogon has done a great job. Sometimes people need to be able to share their stories rather than having them constantly censored like ASR does to anyone who questions their methods. I banned myself from that miserable cultist forum long ago and never looked back.
i will not go back in my acoustics hearing theory rant...
Anyway it seems very few read science articles..
I posted many...
Our ears are designed in a specific way to grasp some qualitative meanings about vibrating sound source these qualia reflecting direct physical invariant of the sound sources. "timbre" is the main exemple.
For Amir all there is to say is in some types of cherry picked electrical measurement about the gear through Fourier linear mapping of a reality which anyway exist not as a linear Fourier map and exist in his own non linear time domain in our perceptive and interpretative consciousness reflecting in himself some physical invariants of the vibrating sound source...
Then Amir stance about sound quality rooted in some set of electrical measures is half truths at best ...
Then ricevs is right here :
How can he be "right" if he thinks that measurements directly correlate to sound.
The Map is not the reality.... The Fourier tools are only that : "tools" ...We dont understand hearing without the vibrating sound source many physical invariant ready to be directly perceived as qualities of sound, timbre, speech, music ...
Also apart for these qualities extracted from vibrating sound sources describing properties of these sound sources. ( is the vibrating object is made of metals or wood or plastic , is it dense or hollowed, is it made of many holes etc )
Apart for the physical invariants of the sound source Acoustician Edgar Choueiri say this:
«
Spatial music is music in which the spatial aspect of sound—the perceived location, extent, and movements of sound sources in surrounding space—is more or less equal in stature to the traditional aspects, or elements, of music—pitch, timbre, texture, volume/dynamics, attack/duration/decay, melody, rhythm, and form. We shall call this traditional aspect of music canonical and contrast it with the spatial.
Our daily experience of sound outside of music is rich in the spatial aspect and poor in the canonical. We constantly hear sounds localized or moving in 3D space, but most sounds—the engine rattle of a passing bus, the rustle of tree leaves in the park, even a melodic birdsong—heard one day are not easily hummable in the shower the next. In most music the opposite has been true: We hum and remember the melodies, and we sway to the rhythms, but we have grown to accept that the spatial location and extent of musical sounds and their movement in space are, at most, secondary to the canonical elements. We are thus as oblivious to the music that is constantly unfolding in natural space as we have been unfazed by the lack of spatial sound in music.»
Then how measuring few electrical specs of an isolated gear design could indicate anything deep about the many sound qualities aspects really ?😊
These qualia and associate qualities (vibrating sound sources information associated with physical invariants in the sound sources) and these 7 spatial qualities identified by Dr. Choueri ( Reverb; Envelopment; Depth & Proximity; Spatial Extent & Resolution; Motion; Spatial Modulation; and Spatial Segregation.)
With the orthodox classical qualities associated with music in history (pitch, timbre, texture, volume/dynamics, attack/duration/decay, melody, rhythm, and form. )
All of this is acoustics phenomenon. Not playback gear design measured specs manifestation.
Then sound quality experience cannot be evaluated nor predicted by few electrical sets of measures submitted to ABX double blind test because hearing is supposedly deceptive...
Ideology is not science even when ideology use electrical tools ...
By the way Amir is a gentleman and a pleasure to discuss with. I cannot say the same for many people here or on ASR who gangstalk people they dont like because they cannot have recognize or use rational arguments.
I think it could be useful to reproduce here the 7 spatial qualities images used by Dr. Choueiri in his article because they are so well done they speak well to our acoustic experience and intuition :
"I don’t like the sound of this so called great measuring inexpensive equipment and like the sound of my tube equipment?" Your personal preference. The measurements do not dictate you what to like or what to buy but inform you of the technical properties of an audio equipment. As long as you think your tube amp distort "pleasingly" you got your money’s worth.
You can identify them easily yourself they are all over the forum just pay extra attention to threads about cables/POWER cables/digital data cables/power conditioners/filters/fuses/receptacles/receptacle covers...
"use my brain/ears to judge how a product sounds to me.."
That’s your ’personal’ opinion. You can use your brain to conclude 1+1=3. But we don’t use your brain but use the measurements data/results to develop/analyze circuits/products. What we electrical engineers do at work modeling/simulation/measurements.
"use my brain/ears to judge how a product sounds to me.."
That’s your ’personal’ opinion. You can use your brain to conclude 1+1=3. But we don’t use your brain but use the measurements data/results to develop/analyze circuits/products. What we electrical engineers do at work modeling/simulation/measurements.
Sorry but acoustics is a science as electrical engineering is, And electrical engineering receive order from psychoacoustics and acoustics discovereies not the reverse : acoustics experience quality is not determined by few electrical sets of measures but by acoustics physical parameters and psychoacoustics parameters...
In my experience and experiment about good sound my ears experience and acoustics experiments to create what is "timbre" and "dynamics" and the spatial qualities of sound in my speakers/room matter more than a % of measured distortion to the xth decimals ...
i dont need ABX Double blind test circus either . Single blind tests as working tool is enough to tune a speakers/room to my liking...
Then claiming that using our ears/brain is not "science" is one thing but claiming that we must replace all along our ears/brain by some limited set of electrical measures is "ideology" or techno cultism ...
Then you do simulation rooted in human hearing universal abilities as measured in acoustics and this acoustics parameters gave electrical designer some frame to work with ...
This does not means that human hearing of the consumers cannot be used in acoustics and in gear design choice... Synergy between pieces is also related to the room and ears of the owner not only to electrical specs of each separate piece of design ...
Then accusing audiophile using their ears to be deceived is as preposterous as someone claiming that electrical set of specs measures had no value...
Objectivist tool ideology and subjectivist tastes gear obsession are marketing ideologies not acoustics science ...
In a word i dont want to buy what and only what ASR measuring Amir recommend and claim that all other recommendation based on subjective takes had zero value ...
Synergy exist, room exist, my ears/brain exist....
If i had done so as seems to recommend some ASR zealot i will be a credulous believer...
I believe only in my acoustics experiments and basic concepts with the relatively synergetical gear i choose because i can play with them and change my acoustics parameters .... Sorry ... 😎
By the way thanks to Amir who tried the Fosi SK1 preamplifier and headphone amplifier with his own ears and with his headphone too not only with electrical measures set and without double blind ABX test and liked it, i bought one and it is for the price a very good purchase, he was exactly right ! ... 😉
Only an improperly functioning brain concludes that 1 + 1 = 3. Convincing yourself of this would be psychotic.
So all posts extoling the virtues of cables, conditioning and the like come from trolls? And you conclude this because these are all components that make no or little difference. This makes no sense, but then begins to make sense when you mention what you do for a living. Never ceases to amaze me that engineers think they have some extra level of credibility by virtue of their education and choice of career. Actually you have less credibility because you are often victims of your education and your desire to quantify everything. Unanswerable questions scare the stuffing out of people who typically do what you guys do.
Check out the different types of distortion that are created by solid state and tube amplifiers. Also check out at what levels of these distortions the brain begins to react negatively. Not all distortion is the same nor are these distortions processed by the human brain in the same fashion as they are detected by measurements. Lower distortion is always better but not when a higher distorting piece gets others things right. No more likely that we talk ourselves into liking a product that measures poorly or is "colored" than you guys convince yourselves into preferring a product that measures well. Once again the only meaningful tests are ones that result from listening and thoughtful comparison.
I have listened over the last 40 years to all types of speakers, amps, preamps and cables and then drawn my conclusions. Correct me if I am wrong, but I doubt you have ever compared cables, amps of different architectures, etc over decades. If you havent it is probably because you know there will be no difference and certainly not enough difference to justify spending large amount of money on such accessories/snake oil. If you dont listen and compare your position is untenable.
If you dont listen and compare your position is untenable.
Absolutely right!
We all listen and compare in specific acoustics environment ...
For ASR zealot 1+1= 0
Electrical specs measures +acoustics environment and psychoacoustics parameters cancel each other.
Or acoustics and psychoacoustics individual experience taken alone = -1 as a deceitful experience , if we speak about sound quality...
All there is to say is in the gear design as measured by ASR...
These specific acoustics parameters of the environment of our speakers/room are ONLY deceitful and reliable ONLY after ABX double blind test of each separate piece of gear ...😊
4 years ago, i discussed here with an engineer in a respectful but very hot way for a week . He argued that the "timbre" experience acoustic variation using different acoustics conditions was only an added color or distortion, a deceitful experience of our ears/brain added to the Fourier map of the sound.
( the fact that our ears/brain can directly perceive something true about the vibrating sound source physical invariant dont struck him as true)
It seems he had no idea what "timbre" is in acoustics save a trouble maker for scientific gear design 😊 ...
At the end after one week of discussion , in desesperation he send me in private his curriculum, a very impressive one, as argument ..
I felt at the same time humbled but proud ...
If an ignorant as i am could learn something anybody can ...😁
The word is not the thing.
The symbol is not the thing symbolized.
The map is not the territory.
The flag is not the nation.
The measurement is not the sound.
Gee, what do they all have in common?
(hint) They are all approximations of sorts, a shorthand for reference, analogous at best and most definitely not the final or best say. To say they are is hubris from someone who wants to sell you a bridge.
The word is not the thing.
The symbol is not the thing symbolized.
The map is not the territory.
The flag is not the nation.
The measurement is not the sound.
Gee, what do they all have in common?
(hint) They are all approximations of sorts, a shorthand for reference, analogous at best and most definitely not the final or best say. To say they are is hubris from someone who wants to sell you a bridge.
When I tactfully stated on a thread on the ASR forum 1 amplifier drove my speakers more audibly better, at low volume, For context I was asking what power ratings really meant when an amp using less than a single watt of power could offer greater detail, dynamics and resolution? The moderator stepped in and said I was evil and and a demon lower than the devil himself to suggest it!!!
NO BS, My reply was simply to ask " Why is someone coming to an Audio Science forum to understand why similar rated amps cause speakers to sound so different a demon? I followed by offering him or anyone else over for a listen as I have the amps all on hand.
Science consists of observing the world by watching, listening, observing, and recording. Science is curiosity in thoughtful action about ... NASA
Science isn’t claiming to know everything, but to continue to explore answers to questions.
@amir_asr If solid state is so much better than antiquated tube gear then why are so many manufactures still using this old science? What say you ? Just curious!
@amir_asr If solid state is so much better than antiquated tube gear then why are so many manufactures still using this old science?
I will give you the answer Bob Carver gave me. As you probably know, he built his career on solid state amplifiers. And even won a challenge organized by Stereophile by making his solid state amplifier sound like a tube amp chosen by stereophile editors.
So naturally I was curious why he has been into tubes. His answer? There was too much competition in solid state space but much less so in tubes! And that tubes were more fun to design. Translation: nothing in there for an audiophile.
Sadly, his tube amps leave a lot to be desired, advertising specs that it cannot meet despite its high cost:
As you can see here, it has 3rd order distortion, not the beloved 2nd order:
And tons of mains noise for added effect.
Can’t deliver a flat response in audible band which solid state amps do in their sleep:
Worst of all, they advertise 75 watts but the thing can’t go past 29 watts.
This is why we measure folks. To get solid information like this as a check on manufacturer claims.
Back to your question, there is no doubt whatsoever that tubes are a marketing tool and differentiation as Bob said. You get underpowered, noisy and high distortion amplifiers and you pay a lot more for it, and have a ton of maintenance to go with it.
Folks see the glowing filaments and confuse that with "warm sound." When I listen to these amps, they are anything but warm. Turn up the volume and they get muddy and routinely bright. Exactly as the measurements predict. See this measurement of the Carver:
Notice how it is blowing its brains out at 20 Hz.
This is primitive technology. The fact that folks throw so much good money after bad over them, only works if you convince people to hate measurements and simple engineering explanation.
The only plausible but random benefit would be that if the high impedance of the amplifier modifies the frequency response of the speaker in the way that makes it more pleasing. That is, two bads working together to make good. Again, this is a random coincident. Better get a proper speaker and drive it with a proper solid state amplifier and get the fidelity you want. If something doesn’t sound good then, it is in your content.
Isn't it interesting Amir how you think audiophiles who look at glowing tubes in the dark are delusional, yet when you look at graphs, you continually convince yourself you are hearing all sorts of horrible distortion. I don't believe you even know what you're listening to most of the time assuming you even take the time to listen in the first place.
I think most of the asr guys live in their grandmas basement and can only afford the “perfectly” measuring 100 buck topping dac so it’s better and anyone who wants more is a Moron.
Isn't it interesting Amir how you think audiophiles who look at glowing tubes in the dark are delusional, ...
Please don't make up stuff. I never said anyone is "delusional."
Everyone is *human.* Humans use all of their senses and past experiences to arrive at a conclusion. As such, someone saying this and that sounds better when the science says otherwise, requires controlled testing that isolates the sound alone. Without it, all of us, me included, could provide totally unreliable and wrong information.
yet when you look at graphs, you continually convince yourself you are hearing all sorts of horrible distortion.
Could be but if you are worried about this, how come you are comfortable making conclusions in your sighted listening?
I don't believe you even know what you're listening to most of the time assuming you even take the time to listen in the first place.
I am a professionally trained listener. I listen to music many hours a day. I perform a ton of controlled testing. Countless reviews I do include listening tests. Here is a recent review with listening tests:
"ZMF Bokeh Headphone Listening Tests and Equalization
First listen impression was non offensive sound which is good in my book. I started by adding EQ to high frequencies first:
That quickly showed that without it, the sound was quite dull with essentially no spatial effects. There was just enough bass but I felt it could have more so put that shelf in there. And added a dip for the extra energy in upper bass. Now the bass was impressive. Note that I deviated from measurements in setting the 6 KHz lower as to avoid extra brightness.
I then sat back and listened. The sound was excellent now on every reference track I have. Bass was thunderous and clean as was the rest of the response. Spatial qualities were improved good bit and I really, really enjoyed the sound. So much so that I am listening to it while typing this."
The equalizations I develop like above routinely get tested and verified by other users and many compliment on how much better their headphones/speakers sound because of them.
I also teach how to become a trained listener as I post earlier.
Finally, you all have been tested formally and shown to be incredibly unreliable compared to trained listeners:
I think most of the asr guys live in their grandmas basement and can only afford the “perfectly” measuring 100 buck topping dac so it’s better and anyone who wants more is a Moron.
We don't think anyone is a moron. We think they are uninformed about how their hearing really works and trust things that are not real and can be trivially shown to be the case. Instead of listening to people who know this topic well, they walk around with fingers in the ear and brag about it too.
Fortunately, huge number of audiophiles have enough common sense to see the value of measurements, and proper analysis of audio gear rather than believing in folklore you can't prove. This is why ASR has over 2 million visitors a month, dwarfing traditional rags such as stereophile:
That aside, you have no idea what you are talking about. My own system costs $100,000. Just this week I tested a $12,000 processor from a member:
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
