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?  



So no, when it comes to electronics, better measurements don’t "necessarily" translate into better sound. In acoustic measurements however, they are highly powerful in predicting preference. A colored speaker is simply liked less than one is that more true to the source. Again, not guaranteed but highly likely.

Interesting that you would use a colored speaker as an example, when my post focussed specifically on amplifiers. Do you have evidence supporting the claim that amps which measure better than tube (or Pass Labs) amps are preferred by a high percentage of audiophiles because they are more true to the source?

So if you want to be critical of what I say, first state my position correctly and failing that, quote me.

lol! Ok, here’s a quote from you that helps to support my original point:

Nelson Pass produces products with copious amounts of distortion. If he thinks that is pleasing, then he should develop critical listening skills so that he can hear the damage he is doing to source signal.


I’m sure that I’m not the only one here who feels your frustration but that’s a little disappointing.

What need is there for this kind of bad blood letting here?



"My only "belief" is I don’t want to alter the signal I’m given, to me measurements will tell me more about whether that is happening than a hearing mechanism cobbled together by evolution."

"Speakers and room I can adjust to what I like..."



In a nutshell, exactly. Replay equipment needs to be sufficiently accurate to the signal it’s given, otherwise it’s likely to be adding audible distortion.

Some might even prefer that added distortion but that’s not really the point of ASR.

When those who follow such a different opposing philosophy it often seems unlikely the two opposing sides can ever be reconciled on such a divisive matter of faith.

This schism between the objectivists on one hand and the subjectivists (+ a few ’high end dealers?) on the other is probably the biggest one there is in audio.

However it’s fairly obvious which side ASR falls on, isn’t it, and that’s hardly likely to change anytime soon, is it?

What I hear is pointless, just as what you hear is pointless. We hear what we think we hear, what we want to hear, what we need to hear"

IMO The first sentence is about personal experience . " I claim to hear no distortion in my digital setup."   What does anyone gain from that? It's really pointless to anyone but me as your experience is to you. I might be glad you enjoy your setup but your impressions of what you hear doesn't impact anything useful to me as mine doesn't to you.

Second sentence is how our hearing evolved. How our ears and brain work. 

So it's not anything weird or controversial as far as I'm concerned. 

I like the guys that have stated that science is observation and measurement. Someday maybe we will have the tools that allow our observations to be measured in a reliable and repeatable way.