Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

"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! 

There is a site filled with posters like him called Audio Science Review.  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. They also occasionally state that the high end audio equipment/cable/tweak sellers are criminals who commit fraud on the public.  They often state that if something scientifically measures better, then it sounds better.   They give no credence to unmeasurable sound factors like PRAT and Ambiance.   Some of the posters music choices range from rap to hip hop and anything pop oriented created in the past from 1995.  

Have any of audiogon (or any other reasonable audio forum site) posters encountered this horrible group of miscreants?  


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.So there is substantial variation between different people and how they hear or listen and what they prefer and yet the hardcore objectivist tends to obsess about electronic components needing to have ruler flat frequency responses and also makes the assumption that everybody has a room that can reproduce a flat frequency response.And yet if you dare suggest that not everybody lives in an anechoic chamber you will be banned from commenting.It as if they want to construct and inhabit some sort of alternative reality based on theoretical parameters and totally ignore real world variables and personal differences.

I do wonder if a lot of them have spent too much time behind a computer screen absorbed in online alternative reality and are not comfortable with the foibles,complexity and diversity of the real world and real people.For them a theoretical construct is going to  be where they feel comfortable.

You’re an audio theologist with money to spare, not a scientist.

Thank you, yes I am. A scientist knows that a tomato is a fruit. The food artist knows not to put a tomato in a fruit salad. 

There is an art to putting together a great system. The person guided only by measurements will often create an unlistenable system with each piece of gear having outstanding measurements. At least that has been my experience.  


Welcome to AG, and thanks for responding to some of the questions raised here.


Alas, I suspect that, despite your best intentions, that earlier post by @rtorchia will prove prescient.


"Amir, your detractors here have a collective motto: “Don’t confuse us with the facts because we know we are right.” It is thus improbable that they will give you a fair hearing."



"If you want to debate speakers with me, then first watch this video on Floyd Toole’s landmark research (link below).


"If you don’t believe in blind A/B/X testing to verify your assertions, then please don’t debate anything with me. You’re an audio theologist with money to spare, not a scientist."


Well said! Your request seems sensible enough for anyone with a genuine desire to educate themselves with at least some of the fundamentals of loudspeaker science, but again, alas I don’t see many takers so far.

Perhaps others here could chime in so we can establish a broader consensus?


When I play a chorale piece on my stereo system the choir fills the front half of the room floor to ceiling. I can hear individual voices across the soundstage. It is not the ultimate in resolution- I have heard systems that can resolve each and every instrument in an orchestra spread out across the room. As I work on my system with both upgrades in gear and with tweaks, I find that the resolving power of the system improves. That chorale piece has evolved from a cloud of sound years ago to individual voices. Its amazing to hear. I have no idea how one would measure or quantify that property of the stereo objectively. I found not just upgrading preamps, amps, and cables improved resolution but isolation and room treatments as well reduce the noise and muddiness or blurring of sounds. Now I can measure the mechanical isolation of my stereo components with an accelerometer and FFT analyzer and I can see that they are isolated from vibrations above 3 Hz. This results in improved resolution and more detail in the music. In addition to those upgrades I also find tweaks to the digital streaming ethernet improves both sound and resolution. It would seem that could be measured but no one seems to be able to get past, "it is just 1’s and 0’s". There seems to be some 2’s and 3’s getting through. :)

It seems naive to just look only at distortion, frequency response or time domain properties. Live music outdoors is like a hemianechoic chamber, ie. no reflections. So the highs roll off very quickly. The same for a concert hall. Someone who likes that kind of music is not interested in strong bright highs. On the other hand, someone who likes to listen to live Jazz or Rock with electric instruments wants to hear the highs. Plus, the same speaker in a different room will sound different. Leave those types of measurements to the manufacturers. The boutique manufacturers voice their gear to satisfy the bulk of their clientele. Not every brand nor every model will be to everyone’s taste.