@milpai
I find it funny that this thread instigated an owner of another site to come here and defend himself and his site.
But how convenient to leave topics he has no idea about and only reply to those which are close to his heart. Never discussed about my last post here on why everyone hears the same sound differently.
Also, what's the point of measuring so many electronics? I don't think he runs a charity. Everyone has got a reason. I don't believe he is doing community service, cause I have seen after every measurement he asks for charity.
And this same poster says that Audiogon members are "biased". But the he measures the equipment and claims to listen to them. How does bias not set in at that point? After all he is a ordinary human being and bias is in human nature.
I could ignore you all but thought there was so much misinformation that I should stop by and clarify. As I have shown, nothing in OP is accurate or correct. He starts with confusing me with another reviewer for heaven sake!
The rest of your post I test far more than electronics. The list includes 250 speakers and 113 IEMs/Headphones for example. Electronics dominate because that is what folks send to me for testing and there are so many of them. I also test a bunch of audio tweaks from USB filters to power cables and conditioners. Folks send them to me and I test them.
I don't run a charity. It is a hobby that I enjoy which happens to create a lot of value for audiophiles. ASR is a joint venture between membership and I. They send me a ton of gear to test. There is fair bit of expense in packing and shipping products back. Small percentage of the membership donates money toward this cause and also because they get a lot of value from the site.
The approach is distinct from the standard model of companies sending products to reviewers. It gives me freedom to express any views I like. And unlike subjective reviews, measurements speak for themselves. So even with manufacturer sent gear, there is strong checks and balances.
The effort has resulted in change in the industry with more and more companies adopting objective measurements in their design cycles. Those who have not, risk falling behind.
Audiophiles have been exceptionally supportive. We have grown to one of the top audio sites in the world.
As to bias, see what you are doing? If I say I don't listen, you complain that I don't. If say I do, you still complain. Which way do you want it? Well I tell you: look at the objective measurements, null tests, knowledge of technology that are the lead in every review.
As to what topics I answer, I have answered a ton already. The format of the forum makes it hard to write replies or I would do a lot more. Then again, if this isn't enough, not sure more would help get some folks' heads out of the sand.
But sure, in your next post instead of complaining and throwing rocks, clearly state what question you want me to answer. There is no technical topic that I am afraid of engaging in.
|
@laoman
"See how we behave on ASR?"
Yes, like absolute arrogant "miscreants", who think they have nothing to learn from others.Just like Amir is behaving here.
So much for you all being open and accepting of other folks.....
|
Someone claimed that on ASR the more you donate, the higher your status. No such thing exists. Members can donate any amount of money they like. They will all get the same title. This is on purpose as to make sure you can't buy your way into have more privileges.
Unlike other forums, donating to ASR doesn't get you anything extra *. You don't get exclusive or early access to content. Everyone sees the same information regardless of whether they have donated or not. Donations are entirely voluntary.
* The only exception to above is that forum donors get to have longer edit time to their threads. This is because we trust them to not be destructive. It is not done to give them a benefit.
|
@fleschler
Have any of audiogon (or any other reasonable audio forum site) posters encountered this horrible group of miscreants?
No, I just got here. 😁
|
I'm just happy I came across that article demonstrating the fallacy of believing static measurements is all there is to know, and needed.
Three things:
1. The stimulus is not static. A sine wave is time varying. A multitone is time varying and complex. Jitter signal (J-test) is also complex and time varying. Only DC signals are static which we don't use for audio testing.
2. For the most part, audio gear is state and memory less. The system performance doesn't change or rely on what came 1 second before current time. In that regard, "static" testing of this sort is quite appropriate.
When testing systems that do have memory such as lossy audio compression (e.g. MP3), we cannot use this type of testing because they do have memory and adapt to signal to being encoded. There, we rely on controlled/blind listening tests.
3. I also using music files for such things as null tests of power cables and such. This is more done to do away with objections like yours more than being a need.
|
@fleschler
"Audiophiles are Snobs" Youtube features an idiot! He states, with no equivocation, that $5,000 and $10,000 speakers sound equally good and a $500 and $5,000 integrated amp sound equally good. He is either deaf or a liar or both!
By now I hope everyone fully understands that OP got me confused with another youtuber (John Darko). He is the one that produced the video with that clickbait title, I did NOT.
As to the rest, price has no impact on whether something "sounds good" or not. As the risk of stating the obvious, I can make a speaker out of gold and charge a million dollars for it. It doesn't mean it will sound better. So the example of $5000 speaker vs $10,000 is without meaning in audio. Products in that price range start to get into luxury range and are often priced to what the market will accept, not what it costs to produce, etc.
A speaker will sound better than another if in controlled testing it shows that advantage, i.e. when you don't know the brand, make, history, looks, etc. Just the sound. Failing that, we can use measurements to rule out broken designs and praise the well engineered ones based on latest science of sound reproduction in rooms.
As a general statement though, a speaker that goes lower and plays louder will be more expensive. So all else being equal, a $10,000 will be better than a $5,000 speaker in this regard. This is why I own a pair of speakers that cost $23,000. It plays extremely low and dynamic in addition to being excellent in other respects.
The example of amps is also dead wrong. An amplifier can sound horrible if it runs out of power. Or have audible hiss that is annoying. Sadly you can get a $5,000 amp that is very low power and hence clips. And or have audible artifacts. Or it can be superb with all the power you need. The only way you know is again, using controlled listening tests or measurements. Random opinion by Joe poster online or youtuber may not apply I am afraid.
|
@fleschler
@invalid BINGO!!!
I was a commercial property appraiser (to be distinguished from residential) for 32 years, constructed apartment buildings and single family tract homes. I chose/use higher quality materials in low income housing to prevent future repair expenses and the safety of my tenants. I use higher quality all brass plumbing fixtures and fittings, only schedule L US or Mexican manufactured copper plumbing and best quality fittings, Bradford-White water heaters, Wilkins water pressure regulators, etc. as an example. Sure, Loews has cheaper plumbing items, but you get what you pay for-expect plumbing failures sooner (a few years) rather than in decades later (w.h. exceptions since they only last 6 years now).
If plumbing was judged like how audio is, you would be using paper for pipes, candles to heat water, little dots around water heater to increase its efficiency, magic tablets to add to water to cure every disease made to man. And have even a simple pipe coupling cost $2,000 because it was made out of this or that metal with cryogenic treatment!
My wish is that audiophiles bring the common sense and logic they use in other fields to their hobby. If the above sounds absurd in plumbing, similar talk for audio should do the same.
|
@td_dayton
@amir_asr cool of you to show up. i have a question - would you say that "if
[insert audiophile claim] can't be measured by my tests, it doesn't exist" is a fair description of your view? why or why not?
Let me first tell you that there is far more to conclusions we draw than measurements. Myself and many members of the forum are engineers and understand how your audio devices operate. We then combine this with careful measurements. And then look at what audio research (published) tells us. If all three arrows point the same way across testing multiple categories of products, then we have very high confidence in our conclusions as to efficacy of such claims.
As an example of above, we know how power supplies work in audio products. So when someone says this power cable "filters" noise that then does the same in your audio output, we can analyze this on all fronts. We know that there are multiple filters working far more effectively in your audio gear than anything a power cable (or conditioner) can do. We then combine that knowledge by showing that said power cable provided no filtering. And even the company itself showed no such evidence. We then go further and produce highly distorted AC waveform and show that the audio gear did its job and nothing changed in its output. After testing a number of such products with the same outcome, we then have a very high confidence answer with strong data to back it.
Please note that this is VERY different than what other objectivists do. I put in tons and tons of effort in testing these audiophile claims. I have tested more interconnects and power conditioners than I can keep track of. And when a new one is offered to me, I test it again in the thought that it may be the one that shows a difference. This should show you the openness I bring to this field. There is nothing "cult-like" about what we do.
Note that there situations where measurements provide part of the answer but not all. Speaker and headphone measurements are very powerful in their predictive power but not sufficient. We don't for example fully know the effect of radiation patter for a speaker in different rooms and for different people. Measurements do however rule out the poor designs and do so with authority. Maybe some of those are still good but there are so many good choices with good engineering so why take a chance?
I recently recommended an IEM. A bunch of people purchased it. About 70% love it and can't imagine how great this $50 IEM is. 10% to 15% say it sounds good but better with EQ. 10 to 15% say it is not for them. This shows how powerful imperfect or incomplete measurements can still be.
|
@kota1
@amir_asr, welcome to the forum, will you reciprocate and allow members here to post on your forum without instant bans because we have a wide range of opinions that may not be popular on asr as long as we are respectful?
You know, your members simply lose it if anyone likes a component that they have 0 personal experience with, but is simply popular to bash. Is this a dialogue that goes two ways or did you just come here to tell us that you are right and we are all wrong?
The idea objective analysis of the performance of a product is that it no longer requires personal touch. An amplifier producing 10 watts vs 200 watts that another produces is a fact. You don't need to be present, own the amp, run it, etc. to know if that is a fact or not. You look at measurements and see the data. So the notion that only people who can have an opinion about a product are those that own or used one is no sequitur.
You seem to be used to people making up imaginary characteristics for audio which only they can experience by playing with such gear. To the extent the facts like this cannot be verified or depended on, then there is no there there.
BTW, the above attitude did not seem to matter to you signed up into ASR to say that the Audioquest Go-4 cable is too old to sound good even though you had not heard it. And the fact that the cable was introduced 7 years ago.
You went on to say that there has been amazing advancements on cable technology as to make that obsolete. And that I and others should abuse return privileges from dealers to keep borrowing cables and returning them. I responded to you that none of this made sense and that it would violate my ethical standard to borrow cables like this.
You then kept posting and posting with nary a single back up research, engineering, etc. Folks eventually got tired of wasting time and ban came. You are welcome to show up and lecture us but make sure you are sharing reliable knowledge and not just claims and chatter.
Finally, if getting banned is a loss to you, then I suggest next time not jumping into a review thread and lecturing how the world turns when it comes to cables. And keep at it for 22 posts straight. If it is no big deal, then move along. We are not shedding a tear and neither should you.
|
ASR "militia" cannot differentiate the difference between biographical summary of one’s music expertise versus self-aggrandizement I am no more important than any other audiophile; however, music experience as an amateur recording engineer in major orchestral halls of well over 250 recordings and for the Erich Zeisl (brother in law of Schoenberg) centenary collection of 11 CDs for Vienna, UCLA and USC establish some credentials that my opinion in how vocal, chamber and orchestral music can (not should) sound is evident. I do not have a "golden ear." I just have a lifetime of experience performing and recording/mastering music.
This is a common retort. That you have been either producing music for many years or an audiophile for the same and hence your impressions are correct. Fact is that none of this trains you to a) be a critical listener and b) make your listening tests reliable. This is not only position of audio research but also my personal professional experience. In my last corporate job, we performed controlled listening tests of hundreds of audiophiles and sadly, they way underperformed our trained testers in hearing compression artifacts.
Research work would be so much easier if we could just recruit people like you and render an opinion about sound fidelity with no controls. But it is not. The only way we know you speak the "truth" about fidelity is to block all other stimulus than the sound arriving at your ear. And further, repeat observations many times to rule out chance. Nothing replaces this. Every shortcut to that is prone to serious faults.
This is an uncomfortable truth for many of us. After all, we call ourselves audiophiles with the intent of saying we know what good sound is like. But it is the nature of how we behave as humans.
You can argue with this and create your own domain of audio not based on realities of decades of research. That is fine. But please don't throw rocks at me at ASR or the membership for using proper science and research as compass of what is right.
|
Adding on to above, post, I have zero skills in recording, mixing and mastering music. In those domains, your experience blows me out of water. So there is no attempt to put that experience down in the slightest. It is just that it doesn't apply to the topic at hand (reproducing of recorded music as opposed to creating it).
|
@invalid
amir I guess you never heard the phrase you get what you pay for, of course there are exceptions to the rule, but in my experience the phrase is generally true.
Oh, of course I have. Problem is that audio marketing has gone so crazy, with people willing to accept any story behind an audio product, that the connection you talk about is long, long gone.
It is through objective testing and engineering analysis that we can figure out if you paid for fidelity, or for marketing claims. I wish this was not the case. I wish there was transparency in audio marketing. I wish people spent more time doing controlled listening tests than to believe every random audio test. If that had happened, yes, more money could get you more fidelity.
A company recently sent me a $20,000 DAC to test. I was very appreciative that they volunteered to do that. I measure it and easily identify and implementation flaw that has long been fixed by "cheap" (but state of the art) asian audio products. The DAC weighed near 50 pounds! It was a massive beast. But it clearly had flawed engineering that was demonstrable. As a courtesy to the company I returned the product to them and didn't publish the results. My hope is that they revise it and produce a performant product. If so, then $20K is not out of line if someone puts value beyond superb sound reproduction.
So no, your experience is not transferable. Any such conclusion means you are paying far more than you should be in audio. The only way to know is to have data otherwise
|
@fleschler
@amir_asr Either you are or are not the owner of ASR. Either way, my conclusion is based on listening results after measurement (if it can be measured-the CD trimmer can measure some characteristics prior to and post trimming by listening to the CD). Since I do not rely on measurements only, I (and all of my many music loving friends) use my listening skills to determine if audio equipment sounds more or less to my liking. Measurements can be very deceiving both in what is and what is not measured as well as the potential synergy with other equipment and listening room.
Of course it is me. Who can make as many typos as I can in a post??? 😀
As to your point, listening tests are the gold standard in audio and have more power than measurements. To get that though, you need to have your tests fully controlled and documented. Just saying you have run this and that test that runs counter to what research and engineering tells us is of no value. You have to document and fully share the controls used to make sure you are only judging sound and results are not random guesses.
If you think measurements can be "deceiving," you have no idea how bad listening tests can be! I can have you listen to two identical audio files and have you tell us they sound different. Indeed that has happened to me! Only when I do a binary compare and realize they are the same that I realize how wrong I was.
To be clear, our sense are accurate. It is our brain that plays tricks on us. You have to learn this lesson. There is no better shortcut to audio truth than this. I wish there was. But there isn't.
|
@fleschler
ASR "militia" cannot differentiate the difference between biographical summary of one’s music expertise versus self-aggrandizement I am no more important than any other audiophile;
Please forgive me for being blunt but what is this "militia" nonsense? There is no single group in ASR. In every review I post (which is about one every day or so), it doesn’t take but a handful of posts before someone complains about my testing or conclusions. The membership is highly critical and does not at all behave like the caricature you are describing.
To be sure, you better expect to get push back when you make outlandish claims without proper evidence. It is no different than going to a Jazz club and insist that the band play country music. And keep getting more and more upset when they don’t and eventually throw you out of the club. This doesn’t make them a "militia" or a cult.
We, at ASR, have chosen to have a compass. That compass says we believe what we can prove. That any statement needs to have back up that is reliable. If you don’t believe in that and want to think ever random audiophile observation is as valid as another, then ASR is not a place for you. Don’t go there, get push back and banning only to complain here. It simply is not logical to do.
And please consider that my reviews are kept professional. I don’t use terms like snake oil, fraud, etc. I create data and let that speaker powerfully to the conclusions I draw. I don’t see why anyone would want less data about an audio product. Even people who send me gear that doesn’t perform well, like to see the facts. They can still choose to keep the product, or not. None remotely get upset. So how come some of you get that way?
|
@fleschler
@amir_asr No, you don't use terms like snake oil and fraud, your minions do.
Minions? How is right for you to use such derogatory term about ASR members yet you are outraged when they term a product those names?
You creating animosity for no good reason. How does this advance understanding of audio technology and performance? Why can't you say your "members" speak that way? Is it too hard to be professional?
And what you would you like them to say when I test a S/PDIF cable for $1,500 and does nothing more than a $20 video cable I use? They are supposed to smile and say, "good for them?" You get to be outraged about people on a forum but they should not about such high cost for a commodity performance cable?
|
@fleschler
Sure you’re professional to a point. Your testing isn’t up to par for many products including speakers and DACs you have reviewed. If you read all this forum’s posts you would know of other review sites with much more extensive testing and testing parameters. I want more data, not less.
Oh yes, there are people who push a button on batch script in the audio analyzer and produce 100 graphs. I call them measurebators: measuring for the sake of measuring. Measurements that don’t provide additional insight into the performance of a product are of no value to me. I much rather test 100 speakers than to test 10 and produce 10 times more graphs just to impress folks like you.
I test some 150 speakers a year. Full anechoic response together with distortion and listening tests. The data is state of the art and verified for accuracy by a number of major companies. If this is not good enough for you, no problem. Just know that without me doing this work, you wouldn’t have any data on most of them.
Finally, what is your reference? Both Soundstage and Stereophile produce a subset of my tests. Their speakers tests are much less accurate and non-standard compliant to boot.
|
@kota1
@amir_asr the militia is not nonsense, ASR is not what I call a forum, non conformrity is flamed, shamed, and banned, it is a firing squad. I think you allow it because if the people paying your bills get good information from other sources it won’t be profitable for you, what do you have to say?
Non-comformity is in play every minute on ASR Forum. As I mentioned, look at every review I do and see the volume of complaints about my review. Heck we have entire threads dedicated to people just complaining about us:
As for my "bills," they don't need paying. I retired after 40 years in technology and can pay for my own bills thank you very much. I do this work because I enjoy it and gives me something rewarding to do. Members donate money because they like the enormous amount of data and information they get on the site. Unlikely many other youtubers, I am not reliant on any incoming. This is why there are no ads, or sponsorships on ASR forum or audio science review youtube channel.
People get themselves banned because they jump into a thread and claim to know this and that is true without an ounce of back up. "Oh my ears tell me this." Great. Keep them to yourself. If you want to convince us, you better come with some understanding of how your ears and perception work. Then folks will listen.
And oh, don't get insulting and personal and make false accusations like what I am responding to. This, will earn a temporary or permanent ban.
|
@rudyb
@amir_asr Well spoken amir. Although, banning someone for stating an opinion is quite harsh, could such in future maybe be solved via discussion or a PM?
OK ... so ... someone claims he/she has a nicer ’soundstage’ after installing an expensive ethernet cable, while if we measure this cable there’s no difference at all in the transfer of the bits and bytes. Or someone else claims more bass extension after upgrading to an expensive power cord ... while it’s inexplicable? These people enjoy their purchase, while others may say they are scammed. How can we live peacefully together?
Thanks. No one gets banned for expressing an opinion. They get banned when they repeatedly try to convince others that they are wrong with no evidence to back it. Member @kokakolia had 117 posts for example before being banned. Member @kota1 had 22 posts in a short span of time with amazing claims of a 7 year old cable is out of date, etc.
Plenty of folks express opinions on ASR with no consequence. As I have said, our aim in ASR is to be able to back what we say. Standard claims of "my ears tell otherwise" repeated over and over again, with whole bunch of talking points thrown in there comes across as "trolling" and eventually we get enough reports to ban the member. Many such members also get personal and upset which accelerates their membership demise.
On PM, we have do that as well when a member brings value to the forum. if you all you have done is join and keep complaining, then you are eventually shown the door per above.
Just saying the tired expression of better soundstage, blacker background, faster bass, etc. doesn't add value and is not evidence of anything. Every audiophile tweak product comes with the same adjectives. Please don't come to ASR and try to convince people the objective data, research and engineering is wrong because you heard or read about such things on the product. We know. We have heard you and others say it. Post that here. Not at ASR.
Finally, purchasing expensive stuff is just fine. I routinely recommend super expensive products that perform well. Many put value on how things look, feel, support, country of origin, etc. What is much less tolerated is when the company makes outlandish claims of fidelity, and measurements, listening tests, etc. show that it is not true. Then, if you are an expensive product, you get an earful.
As an example of expensive product that is recommended is this Mola Mola DAC and streamer at $11,500:
|
It’s like wine tasting ... we can objectively measure acidity and spectrum analyze the exact chemical composition, still people will smell and taste different things.
The wine equivalent is the music you play. The right analogy is the glass. Testing is to make sure your gear like that glass doesn't impart it's own coloration and distort the art.
|
Amir welcome. So are these negative posts having a negative impact on your collection basket?
Thank you. We don't have ads on ASR Forum. If we did, negative and bickering posts would help with that in how it increases page views. So you have that backward on two fronts. The fight here is helping the owner collection basket. Have you filed protests on that?
|
@kota1 I believe that you're asking too much from Amir and ASR. Amir has a firm grip on ASR. Amir has strong convictions. Amir is intentionally deaf to opinions expressed which go against his convictions.
I am not deaf to anything or I would not tested huge number of ineffective audiophile tweaks. The more data the better. Some of you rather not see this data. It angers you even though you lack technical knowledge of the field. You could choose to learn. But instead come here to complain, acting like you know more than whole of audio science. So look to yours6fir character flaws. That is where the answer is if you want to advance your knowledge of audio.
|
@kota1
@amir_asr , I have asked in this thread and through DM's, is this a two way street or are you going to tear down the wall at ASR? No one is stopping you from posting here, why are you avoiding this (and many other) questions? Are you a drive by poster or what?
There is no wall at ASR. Hundreds of members join the forum from all walks of life. Only a handful get banned because all they want to do is argue and not provide any data to the conversation. All claims are empty such as yours: "you should not test a cable before 100 hours of burn-in." When asked based on what, you have no answer. You can't explain the engineering. You can't back it with any controlled test. Yet want to repeat that 22 times in one hour demanding that folks believe you. Well, we don't. We have better things to do than cater to likes of yours.
If on the other hand you are interested in proper discussion of audio science and engineering, then you have a great home in ASR.
And to be clear, I am NOT here as a appeal court for your banishment from ASR. I am here to answer questions and clear up misconceptions posted about us. So please don't keep asking me to remove your ban. You had the opportunity to be a constructive member but you threw it away. And that is that.
|
@jtgofish
ASR love to quote Floyd Toole and research done at Harman.Which is fine but the findings there have also shown that the average listener does not prefer a flat frequency response .Far from it.And different types of listeners prefer different frequency response curves and these are only averages anyway so do not properly reveal the extent of this variation.
Above tells me you either have not read Dr. Toole's research or understood it.
He absolutely does NOT advocate flat-in-room response. The response should be sloping down. Otherwise the sound will seem bright.
What he advocates correctly and what is followed by many top designers in the world is flat-on-axis response, and off-axis that is smooth and similar to it, but pointing down.
On-axis response is NOT an average by the way. It is a single anechoic measurement. Of axis is made up of key strong reflections in a room. Research shows that they are most critical when it comes to off-axis performance.
Your statement about different people wanting different sound is incorrect. This has been researched across hundreds of listeners of all types. Most of us like very similar sound and in controlled testing, pick the same speaker as the best. See:
And no, we don't accept everything Dr. Toole and his research team say. I for example don't publish preference scores for either speakers or headphones.
These are the topics we discuss day in and day out in ASR. So if this is of interest for you, ASR is the right place. If you want to stick to folklore of "we are hear differently," then not so much.
|
@decooney
The most respected audio designers listen more with their ears than a graph.
How on earth would you know the list of audio designers and the "respected" subset? And how do you know that is a truth as opposed to a talking point post poor measurements of their gear?
I can also say the opposite. How would anyone know if you are right or I am?
I will answer: you need to understand electronic design. If you did, you would know the above claim can't possibly be true. Modern electronic design starts with simulation and full analysis of circuit performance including things like distortion, frequency response, etc. Then prototyping starts with the designer's eyes glued to instrumentation like voltmeters, oscilloscopes, and if we are lucky, audio measurement gear. If they lack the latter, heaven help us as they have no idea if they are designing something performant!
But let's say you are right. So what? I am supposed to trust the ears of a Joe designer? They could have all the design expertise in the world. It doesn't mean they have critical listening skills and know how to compare audio gear sound without bias in controlled listening tests.
Bottom line: you are falling for marketing lines. Demand proof that their equipment is well engineered and transparent to the source. Anyone can say anything. Ask for reliable, third-party verification. Don't worship heroes. Insisting on validation.
|
@westcoastaudiophile
I have couple questions to “ASR Tests Originator”:
1: Can you please describe your measurement equipment' employed at ASR LAB? I assume tester is calibrated, maintained, and upgraded periodically, - correct?
You assume wrong. We are not interested in metrology, or measuring things with repeatability to 5 decimal places. Typical SINAD (noise+distortion vs signal) varies by a 1/10th of a dB as the gear is sitting there.
That aside, call Audio Precision and ask if their analyzers require calibration. They will tell you that only if you are doing government work and such and need such "cover your behind" certificates. Measurements I perform are routinely replicated by manufacturers and other third-parties.
That aside, I have a long list of equipment in the lab. Key ones are:
Audio Precision APx555. This is a $28,000 state-of-the-art analyzer. It is used for testing DACs, headphone amps, amplifiers, pre-amps, phono stages, etc. I have been a customer of Audio Precision since early 1990s when I worked at Sony. AP is the gold standard in audio measurements.
Headphone measurements are based on APx555 above with addition of GRAS 45-CA measurement rig ($14,000).
Speaker testing is performed using Klippel Near-Field Scanner from German company. It is a robotic system for measuring anechoic response of a speaker in 3-D space. It costs roughly $100,000.
These are the core instruments. Beyond them, I have a ton of other gear from scopes to meters and everything in between for specialized testing.
I would say if you had to put together a lab like mine, you would need about $200,000 of capital investment plus tons of specialized knowledge and experience.
- are you doing your measurements in Faraday Cage?
-what cabling, loading, power, additional filters, shielding, etc are used for ASR tests? ..and why do you think your test setup is good to represent average user?
2: How do you select units for tests? Do you receive devices from manufacturers, or do you obtain those randomly?
No Faraday cage. Those are used for EMC testing. None of you use your stereo gear inside such a cage so I don't see why I should test them that way.
Cabling for XLR is Mogami Gold. For RCA, I use Amazon Basics. No power conditioning is used or needed. I have tested a ton of these and either do nothing, or impair performance. I do have a LAB AC generator that I use for special testing. Ditto for DC lab generator.
Vast majority of audio gear that I test comes from members or those that I personally buy. Manufacturer gear is 5 to 10% of the total. I routinely test duplicates sent by members and have yet to see a case where the company sent unit is golden sample. A number of companies also offer that test units be purchased randomly if there is lack of trust.
|
@fleschler
Amir-again dumb retort. Of course good designers use test equipment to design and test their results. However, if it ended there, they are making HUGE mistakes without knowing it.
Well, the dumbest thing is to take the word of a designer attempting gorilla marketing in forums and such. Why on earth would you trust what he has to say about his own gear? Isn’t he totally biased to get you to buy his gear? Would you trust a drug from a drug company with no government certification and controlled testing? Why would you put your guard down when it comes to audio? What happened to common sense?
And no, they would not make "HUGE" mistake if they stopped at instrumentation. As I explained, there is no reason to know they have good ears whatsoever. On what basis you put any value on what they think of their own gear vs another? He knows how to design electronics but all of a sudden, he has golden ears too?
Nothing wrong with claims about fidelity. But that better be in controlled listening tests published with full documentation. Him saying he tried many things and the one being sold is the best is hogwash.
I tested a PS audio directstream DAC. It measured poorly in low frequencies. After a bunch of back and forth with claims you believe in, it turns out that for cost reasons they used low quality transformers that produced more distortion! Multi-thousand dollar DAC used low quality parts. So you better not believe company claims. Your trust should only be on what you can verify. And I am here for verification. If you don’t like that, setup your own controlled listening tests. These are the only proof point that respected audio journals accept. Don’t make up your own methods. They only serve to confuse you into spending money after bad.
|
@invalid
My oscilloscope doesn't listen to music.
Then you don't know how to use it or it is broken.
|
@fleschler
Speaker designers who don't listen to adjust settings are not very good designers.
I am sure the person I was responding to was talking about electronic design. Of course speaker designers listen to their speakers. Key is whether they do that using controlled testing or not. And whether they use proper set of measurements in addition to that. If the answer is that they don't use such measurements and only use their own ears to figure out what is or is not good sound, it would be a speaker I would stay away from.
|
Going back to OP:
@fleschler
They give no credence to unmeasurable sound factors like PRAT and Ambiance.
We give credence to anything that is described as soundwaves coming out of your audio gear. If your assessment of the above only happens when your eyes are looking at the gear as well as your ears, then no, we can't measure that as we are not instrumenting the visuals of audio gear.
Come back and show that the above characteristics survive "ear only" evaluation using blind controlled test and I will show you measurements that catch them. Until then, please don't repeat audiophile folklore and worse yet, spend money toward them.
|
@kota1
@fleschler
Going back to OP:
If a reasonable person posts, they immediately tear him down, using selected words and/or sentences from the reasonable poster as100% proof that the audiophile is dumb and stupid with his money.
There is no denying this as true, it even continues in this thread right now with the "financially independent" as he calls himself @amir_asr lecturing us about money and audio. It never ends, unless uhhh what was that about someones pockets?
It should now be very clear why we ban this individual. Constant bickering with no constructive and useful information to share. It is all about him and what he demands to know. Give him answer and it goes in one ear and comes out the other, repeating the same argument over and over again.
|
@tonywinga
That is because Danny listens to the products. He also understands and explains what the measurements mean and how it affects the sound. At least on the videos that I watched. And his upgrade kits make sense. Plenty of DIY'ers do the same things.
Once more, he does NOT listen to any speaker he upgrades. Ever! He says this in videos from time to time. Even if he does not, watch one of his upgrade videos. All he shows are crude before and after frequency response measurements and that is it. You are supposed to trust him that the sound got better.
As to his upgrades making sense, they do most of the time from technical point of view. But not remotely on cost basis. He also detests EQ which can do the same thing for free. As member said, follow the money. EQ doesn't make him money so he doesn't like it. What proof he provides? He just knows that it doesn't.
|
@ticat
I repeat....
Always follow the Money...
You say that but you don't follow that advice, do you?
Some of you know that I am the founder of a company (Madrona Digital) that does custom integration of electronics into very high end homes.
One day a local distributor called us for a meeting. He said that we should source flat screen TVs from them. I asked them how their prices were compared to big box stores. He said, "if they have a sale, then our cost to you will be higher!' I asked him how we were going to do that? He said, "you can match their prices and then make money on selling them cables and extended warranty!!!" With cables having as much as 70% gross margin, you can see why he said that.
Do you listen to this? No. You happily go and pay thousands of dollars for non-performant gear that only enriches the manufacturer at your expense. You believe what they say on their website. You believe random youtuber getting eval gear and gushing over said cable. And oh, the more expensive that cable, the better it must be. Never mind that the more expensive, the more it enriches the manufacture.
So no, you don't believe in that. You are using it as a cheap talking point without foundation to boot.
To repeat, all the information on ASR forum is available to everyone for free. No content is behind paywall or delayed for paying members to read first. Large number of ASR members read the forum without any contribution. And are not looked down upon whatsoever.
I am fortunate enough to be independent and don't rely on ASR to make money. If it were different, I would turn on ads and allow sponsorships as all other sites do.
Am I here to solve world hunger? No. I have my interested in what I like to do and test. It just happens that this interest aligns with the needs of many audiophiles. They appreciate the uncluttered site that is not running banners everywhere you look. Or my youtube channel where there is zero begging for subscription, likes, etc. And has no monetization even though I am fully qualified by Google to do so.
If this is not for you, then that is that. But stick to facts and don't make proclamations that are simply not true.
|
@kota1
@amir_asr , I think the perception about ASR being a cash grab is a legitimate question. You do ban members with views that don't conform, you do pass the plate in every review, and as you often say yourself, you are a dealer and that visitors to ASR should read as much bias as you like into your posts. I get that the perception may be different from the reality but it is a legitimate question.
Now, are you finally going to tell us about your system, what you bought, why you like it, what you are trying to achieve?
I have addressed that question multiple times now. If you still don't understand the answer, that is more on you than me.
As to my system, you can see a brief overview and pictures in this review thread: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-lyngdorf-roomperfect-eq.6799/
I am not here to write you essays about why I bought it. Nor do I walk around constantly talking about my system.
|
@jtgofish
Amir what I meant by average is that there was no detail of the spread of listener preferences from which the type of listener average was calculated.That might have been quite an even and narrow bell curve or quite uneven and wide one.So it does not really show relative variability between individual listeners.
Full set of data is available in research papers from Dr. Olive. As are groupings. There is no bell shape to them. We are all remarkably similar in how we like uncolored sound (in blind/bias controlled testing). There are sure to be outliers but unless you know 100%, then better not think that.
|
Now addressing this bit in OP:
@fleschler
Some of the posters music choices range from rap to hip hop and anything pop oriented created in the past from 1995.
How on earth did this pass as an argument? "Some of the posters" listen to this and some other music? What if they did? That makes them less of a music lover and audiophile?
The tastes of our membership runs the gamut just like it does in any forum. We have a long list pinned to our home page:
It has nearly 16,000 tracks/albums people love! Clearly OP has no idea about our music preferences any more than he does about every other thing he claimed there.
|
@tonywinga
Danny, a real audio and measurement guy tests and tears down speakers costing thousands of dollars and shows us the low cost parts inside.
He does with the clear aim of making a ton of money from you. He claims to have upgraded this and that part. While he measures the speaker, he refuses to provide any measurements showing these upgrades have any value in this regard. He also does NOT listen to any upgraded speaker. He claims "he just knows" it makes the sound better. I am sure.... Someone said to follow the money. I said you are not and here is perfect proof of it.
Why not be more critical of company's claims when they are trying to sell you something? Why not hold them to a high standard of proof? Danny says it with that charming southern accent so must be true?
The kits he sells are hugely overpriced. None of his DIY solutions are competitive. By the time you waste all that money on his upgraded parts, you could get far better performing speakers across the board.
I tested his GLK 2.0 which was absolutely terrible even though it has all those upgraded parts:
Really, if you are into hero worshipping and appeal to authority instead of facts and knowledge, we don't have much to talk about.
|
@tonywinga
Measurements by themselves mean nothing.
That's right. This is the reason we follow extensive research into what measurements to use and invest incredible amount of money and time to get them. The research into speaker design is very authoritative. But if you have not read and understand them, then you wind up being dismissive. Membership in ASR will get you that knowledge. Without it, you are lost forever, throwing random darts at the wall.
Note that I listen to every speaker I review. Measurements are the foundation but I test them by listening. And equalization.
I also listen to every headphone and every headphone amplifier. These constitute about half of what I review.
I perform more listening tests in a month than others do in a year or even lifetime!
So the notion that we only measure on ASR is completely wrong. It is a false notion to justify having one's head in the sand regarding authoritative work that we on ASR.
|
@russ69
"Long term listening is still the gold standard of audio evaluation. Short term evaluations often lead to errors but it's much harder to hold an inaccurate evaluation over the course of many listening sessions and sometimes it takes many hours to find the faults of the playback system.
That is a myth unfortunately. Your long term memory is quite "lossy" as the brain can't possibly remember everything the hearing system captures. This has been proven through controlled listening tests:
"The results were that the Long Island group [Audiophile/Take Home Group] was unable to identify the distortion in either of their tests. SMWTMS's listeners also failed the "take home" test scoring 11 correct out of 18 which fails to be significant at the 5% confidence level. However, using the A/B/X test, the SMWTMS not only proved audibility of the distortion within 45 minutes, but they went on to correctly identify a lower amount. The A/B/X test was proven to be more sensitive than long-term listening for this task."
See how we behave on ASR? you say something but provide no proof. I say it and not only provide proof, but also fundamentals of how our hearing works.
|
@boxer12
Amir,
As an audio equipment reviewer, why do you choose not to actually listen (with music) to every audio component you review?
Note that I already understand (from your prior post) that you do listen to speakers & headphones. I'm wondering why you limit actual listening tests to those and don't bother to listen (again with music) to amps, dac's, etc.
Speakers and headphones as you know have big differences from each other. Furthermore, I can use blind testing of EQ to verify measurement accuracy.
With headphone amps, I push them to limit to see when they get distorted. Once there, there is no debate there.
With other classes of devices, impairments get very small to non-existent. No ad-hoc sighted test is going to be reliable and produce defensible claims. The only believable data would be controlled, double blind testing. I simply don't have the time or resources for this type of testing. So measurements plus psychoacoustic analysis stand in as substitute.
I do listen to this other class by the way in my everyday enjoyment and work. A headphone amp or speaker/headphone is driven by DACs. I do not find them to have any coloration or distortion. Stuff subjectivists report are like fantasy to me. I have probably 100 to 150 DACs here (no exaggeration). I have yet to fire one up and say, "oh, the soundstage has changed, bass is this and that, etc." This is of course backed by measurements and psychoanalysis measurement.
For people who claim there are differences in this class of equipment, for once, they need to perform an AB test without their eyes and with enough trials to provide reliable results. If they can even identify the difference, I will give them a cookie. :)
Our brain is a wonderful thing in the way it can adapt and change how it works. It can work without analyzing fidelity, or be told to focus into the smallest detail. The latter is what happens when audiophiles are testing gear. Such focused analysis results in hearing things that were always there, but discarded by the brain. It is NOT the result of the gear being different. Once this concept is understood, there won't be requests for "why don't you listen with music."
Among essentially transparent gear, I identify the ones that are best engineered. Much of this gear is also extremely economical, providing a perfect selection for your systems. That is, if you believe in audio science, engineering and how one's perception works.
Let's say for a moment the above is not true. And that there are audible difference. Why would you trust what I would have to say about it? Why do you trust anyone? Is your room the same as theirs? You play the same music? Your ears are the same? You see the problem? This is myth piled on top of myth that anything reliable is stated in subjective evaluation of audio electronics.
BTW, professional reviewers were tests with speakers in blind controlled tests. They did very poorly and could not even produce reliable let alone correct assessments!
Notice how reviewers were worse than audio salespeople!
|
As an example of comprehensive level of testing I do, and on topic of Danny and cables, here is a video review of his power cable:
|
@invalid
How can anything new be invented if we already have perfection according to the measurements you guys often talk about.
Putting aside once more the mischaracterization that my reviews are only measurements, some devices have achieved audible perfection, some have not. state of the art DACs for example exceed the capabilities of our hearing even in the best case situations. You might think you can hear my toilet flush from where you live, but you can't really. Your hearing has limits so equipment only needs to get better than it which is the case now.
In other cases such as speakers and headphones, perfection is not remotely there.
I think your disconnect is that you believe marketing hype that every day there is a new DAC that solves an audible problem. You know, what every audio company claims with out a single shred of proof. No listening tests for example that demonstrates anything.
What is remarkable is that in audio, person after person comes to the defense of manufacturers, backing their marketing claims and throwing the poor consumer under the bus. So much money is wasted because consumers have put their guard down completely and joined the other camp!
Show them independent testing and they scuff at that. "Oh, this means nothing can be invented then." Or yeh? Why do you want something to be invented? Why not spend your extra cash on music? Or a nice meal? Or a vacation? Must you go and waste it away on some new power cable? A DAC? Why oh why?
|
@ticat
Ooops ...Sorry ... Hit a nerve there huh...?
BTW... my 2 chanel system consists of amplifier, pre-amplifier and phono pre-amplifier that are custom built KITS...SUT is custom built from various parts... tone arm is hand made in England. TT is vintage, with updated internal parts. Speakers are used, with updated OEM parts and upgrades from the designer.
Yeah the Marketing Boggie Man really got me.... you really Nailed it.
Good deal. But are we done with your conspiracy theory of me chasing money? If not, please state your remaining objection so I can address it. And yes, it is absolutely important to me that my ethics are not questions in that manner.
|
@russ69
The myth is that short term blind testing with unknown recordings, with unknown equipment, in a strange environment provide accurate results. Blind testing generally gives a null result, it's use as a scientific tool is very questionable. It generally gives no result.
Sorry, no. The myth is that there is time limit to blind testing. Or that you are forced to use supplied music. The AES paper I referred you to allowed audiophiles to take a distortion box home, connect it to their system and spend as much time on it as they wanted, and play whatever wanted. They failed such a test compared to another group that performed fast AB switching.
As to always getting null results, that is also completely wrong. I have passed and documented very challenging blind ABX tests. I am able to do that by being a trained critical listener and using very fast switching. If switching is slowed, I fail to test many if not all of them.
I suggest reading ITU recommendation (standard) BS111.6 on how to detect small impairments:
RECOMMENDATION ITU-R BS.1116-1*
METHODS FOR THE SUBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT OF SMALL IMPAIRMENTS
IN AUDIO SYSTEMS INCLUDING MULTICHANNEL SOUND SYSTEMS
"Since long- and medium-term aural memory is unreliable, the test procedure should rely exclusively on short-term memory. This is best done if a near-instantaneous switching (see Note 1) method is used in conjunction with a triple
stimulus system as described in Appendix 3. Such switching demands close time alignment among the stimuli."
You are arguing against the very nature of how your perception works. Not only experts in audio will disagree with you, so will those in the medical community who research the same. No way your brain has the capacity to remember every bit of fidelity in music you listen to hours and days later. It is impossible.
But again, nothing in the protocol requires you to listen for longer if you so wish. I am just telling you that your ability to detect differences goes down. If you want to ignore that, then fine. Just make sure the test only involves your ears, and not the rest of your senses.\
Here is a video I produced on that:
|
@westcoastaudiophile
Amir, your equipment and tests are “too ancient” and missing novel micro-dynamics, transient, noise and more important performance metrics High volume manufacturing data is missing in your tests as well.
Too ancient? What is not too ancient if you don't mind listing?
For now, my AP has a noise floor that is low enough to produce signal to noise ratio as high as 130 dB:
*Best case* dynamic range of our hearing system is 115 dB (limited by max SPL and noise level of the auditory system). With 130 dB like above, we have ample headroom.
Transients are trivial to measure and I show them all the time to satisfy people even though they have so little meaning as far as fidelity.
As to "high volume manufacturing," that is not my job. It is manufacturer's job. BTW, such testing usually uses (an obsolete) audio analyzer with "go/no go." Precision is not required there although would be appreciated if it existed.
My job is to determine performance of an audio device. Not its reliability. No reviewer can give you that data. The fact that you think my equipment is "obsolete" to do that and that I am supposed to do such testing makes my head spin!
|
@westcoastaudiophile
@amir_asr "
No Faraday cage. Those are used for EMC testing. None of you use your stereo gear inside such a cage so I don’t see why I should test them that way.
Cabling for XLR is Mogami Gold. For RCA, I use Amazon Basics. No power conditioning is used or needed. I have tested a ton of these and either do nothing, or impair performance. I do have a LAB AC generator that I use for special testing. Ditto for DC lab generator."
Thanks Amir for response! I can ignore your test results now!
Well that was anti-climatic! :) FYI I own high-end cables like Transparent Audio, Audioquest, etc. that when needed, I use. Usually to deter excuses like you made above. But no, my measurement gear didn’t come with such cables, nor is there a single recommendation to use such.
Do you have any data that measurements are impacted by the things you mention? Or is it just gut anxiety?
|
@westcoastaudiophile
disclosure: I am experienced analog circuit design engineer, currently working at major US corporation
Good deal. Please list the audio measurement gear you use and some of the data produced by it. And once there, please explain why you measure at all as some folks here seem to not like them at all.
|
|
@westcoastaudiophile
@amir_asr "Measurements I perform are routinely replicated by manufacturers and other third-parties” - please provide proof to your statement.
Sure, I don't have them all memorized but here are a few:
Genelec (top manufacturer of studio monitors):
"Company was kind enough to review and approve the measurements you are about to see."
Neumann (another top studio monitor manufacture):
"You expect the company to deliver, and deliver it does! Other than a minor dip around 50 to 60 Hz, frequency response is flat and extends to both ends of audible spectrum. We exchanged measurements and company's on-axis response has a smaller dip to the tune of 0.8 dB. This has been a continuing theme with Neumann speaker bass response. Either they are wrong a bit here, or Klippel NFS is. No way to adjudicate. Doesn't matter anyway as your room will wildly modify that region so what the speaker outputs is pretty secondary other than amount of SPL it produces."
Denon:
"Note: Denon engineering was kind enough to review these measurements and confirm that they match their expectations."
Trinnov (highest end manufacturer of AV processors):
"The measurements you are about to see were reviewed by the company and were agreed upon as being representative. "
Again, there is a lot more than this. I have reviewed 1,300 products in the last four years. If there were issues with my measurements, there would be riots in streets from manufactures. You don't see that. Instead you see companies like Schiit throwing out their obsolete audio measurement machine, buying the same unit I have, and a year later produce far more performant products. Indeed, they send me samples to test and now publish their own measurements.
|
@westcoastaudiophile
@amir_asr do I get it right what you say: -130dB using Amazon RCA basic cables in not shielded chamber? Without power filters or RFI noise control etc?
Yes to all except that measurement is balanced which is using ($30) Mogami Gold XLR cables. No filters. No cages. No nothing. Just a superbly engineered audio device being measured by state of the art audio measurement gear.
They way you are stating that tells me you don't have any experience measuring such audio gear or with this instrument as that kind of performance is routine for devices I test.
|
@kata1
You have already stated that you consider subjective experience is a fantasy.
What? I said controlled listening tests, which by definition are subjective, are the gold standard. It seems you are not familiar with the terminology here.
It is sighted, ad-hoc testing that produces highly unreliable conclusions. Just close your eyes, follow the protocol in the video I described and you get to proper audio truth about your gear. Otherwise, what you are saying is a mix of your state of mind and gear.
|
