The Audio Science Review (ASR) approach to reviewing wines.


Imagine doing a wine review as follows - samples of wines are assessed by a reviewer who measures multiple variables including light transmission, specific gravity, residual sugar, salinity, boiling point etc.  These tests are repeated while playing test tones through the samples at different frequencies.

The results are compiled and the winner selected based on those measurements and the reviewer concludes that the other wines can't possibly be as good based on their measured results.  

At no point does the reviewer assess the bouquet of the wine nor taste it.  He relies on the science of measured results and not the decidedly unscientific subjective experience of smell and taste.

That is the ASR approach to audio - drinking Kool Aid, not wine.

toronto416

Showing 1 response by gregm

I find ASR useful, more or less for the same reasons @analog_aficionado mentioned earlier.

What I find tiresome there is the constant bickering, the constant subjectivity bashing (the most popular threads!), and the general disputatious mood that pervades the discussions; many members are arrogant and too ready to argue rather than discuss. Amir calls for "happy" people interested in fun & learning, but it seems that he has attracted many "unhappy, bitter, and argumentative" members instead.

Too bad!

Regarding testing & the ratings, the ASR formula is simple: whatever measures better in the battery of tests performed rates better. However, unless the reader knows how to correlate the measurements to his (her) auditory tastes, the measurements are meaningless indications -- entertainment material at best. 

You may or may not like the sound, i.e. the rating does not necessarily indicate which device you'll ultimately prefer, so you are hardly going to use said measurements as the ultimate buying choice.

Neither do many of the members. IIRC Amir himself uses old ML class A monos, not high SINAD NCore or Purifi based products.