Mastering legend Bernie Grundman explains why the measurement crowd has it all wrong!


There's a great new interview with Bernie Grundman about the AJA UHQR where he relates that a component that a measures perfectly, but uses a lot of electronics in the signal path to get that result, sounds inferior to electronics that don't even measure flat, but have less in the pathway.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGLFTm6jMrY

I recently read one of these "reviews'' where they admit they mostly don't even listen, but just rely on measurements.  It was one of the most amateur reviews I had ever read, and now the we have one of the top trusted golden ears (one who actually creates the content) state that measurements don't indicate what something is going to sound like.

I'll take Bernie's perspective over an idiot with an analyzer touting cheap gear that measures well, just to make people feel superior about their (sometimes) midfi gear.

emailists

The venerated Decware is only about $1500 and is undoubtedly high end. But that’s an exception I think. 

Iam Bernie’s fan.He is into music than measurement, Chad Kassem is blessed to have Him doing projects for Him.His wife is just involved collecting good music.

Measuring needed to be at least DOZEN of times before cutting ONCE. That's the golden rule of measures. 

 

What do you mean by this? Do you mean that the measurements must be taken multiple times?  I know a certain somebody that measures many devices a week and I don't think he takes enough time to get proper measurements.

The !measurements only crowd" is on par with the "high-end price tag gear bragging crowd"...

The two crowds ignore all embeddings controls and ignore especially acoustics which they reduce not even to room acoustic but to the purchase of few acoustic panels at best ...

Psycho-ascoustic rule the gear not the reverse ...

😁