Is ASR for real, or is it only for those sub $1k or even sub $2K?

@markwd 

It seems you are mistakenly conflating a person's native language with their ability to articulate a cogent point.

To wit, there is no shortage on this forum of obviously native English speakers who don't make any sense either.

Incoherence and nationality have nothing in common, assuming the writer possesses a minimal level of proficiency in the language being used. To suggest otherwise - and I'm sure that's not your intent, but it never hurts reiterating - hews dangerously close to discriminatory talk.

@devinplombier Of course! I've interacted with @mahgister on many occasions and have fairly consistently been baffled. As I mention, I am very sympathetic if that's the driving factor but my secondary point was that Amir might simply not have understood him.

I am accused to be incoherent in my debate with Amir. You supposed that by acoustics (with an s) and psycho-acoustics  i was speaking merely about room acoustic (without s) which proves not only you misread completely what i was speaking about, theoretical and applied acoustics.

But you prove you had not read even one of the 8 articles   i posted all related from different scientists, all aiming to  old theory of acoustics  as insufficient  to explain hearing with linear frequencies response without taking into  account  the non linear domain where lives our ears/brain...( the  Fourier maps are not the territory)

I spoke about the perception of "timbre" as something Amir dont understand...He never answered about Van Maanen observation  about this because he does not and cannot understand them, if he did,his marketing will appear as a fraud or a bad informed claim...As said the maxim if you are paid  to see nothing, you will not see nothing...

Comical and pathetical that someone accuse me of being unable to wrote coherently here but dont even understand the matter which is at stakes...And i dont mind if you dont read my posts but the articles i refered to  were fundamental et spoke for themselves...

My English is not good but my brain work very well ...

@mahgister I believe I responded to some of your claims about the papers in that same thread? As above, though, you have a tendency to write in scattershot and incoherent ways. I assume English is not your first language and am very sympathetic since I can’t make consistent sense in any of the other languages I study, but it does make it complicated to understand your arguments!

If your point here is primarily that room optimization is important, you can, for instance, search for REW on ASR and you get 20 pages of posts on various aspects of using REW. A search for DIRAC also yields 20 pages of posts.

i underlined your mis- repreasentation of my debate with Amir...

Acoustics is a complex field where room acoustic is a small part...

the acoustics context where measures and parameters made sense or not or are not sufficient this was the core debate not room acoustic...

it seems no one read a single line of the 8 articles i posted...

Then someone dare to accuse me to be incoherent...

We can laugh or wept...it is our choice...i laugh....

Is this post answering you is clear?

Coherent?

I hope so....

@mahgister Fair enough (I think!) I do recall reading through a couple of your papers on hearing and psychoacoustics (at least one I was familiar with which was a long-form overview of human auditory systems).

There may be a disconnect, though, in the focus on how to apply psychoacoustics and acoustics in the reproduction of music. For instance, we know about ideas like masking and frequency binning, as well as nonlinear properties of hearing, but what we are primarily doing in reproducing music is trying to achieve fidelity to the original sources. We can do important things like room correction, binaural processing, DSP, to try to compensate for the limitations at the headphone/speaker/room level. There is also the amazing mathematics for spatial representations that we are now becoming accustomed to.

So is your complaint that ASR and Amir don't spend enough time discussing these topics that you consider more relevant to auditory science and spend too much time on equipment? Is that your beef?

I have "no beef" against Amir...

Making measures and verifying specs is useful for all...

Once this is done and said,

Claiming his set of measures is all there is to say about human hearing "truth" which must be debunked with double blind test is Amir claim, which become, as it was said in a less diplomatical way than me, Milind Kunchur (he was attacked by Amir ) a cult guru.

Amir has a bone against subjective audiophiles ...

Myself i trust acoustics (with an s) to understand sound and music experience which is my goal now...

I am no more in applied acoustics  and experiments for my own sake... I am satisfied with my system/room and headphones too ...

Yes it is a good thing if ASR and audiogon may speak more about room acoustics because it is the core of any audio experience. But nowadays this imply DSP  also not just mechanical acoustics...

But the most important subject for our own education is hearing theory and my debate with Amir was only centered on this and  not on room acoustic  physical and psycho-acoustics parameters versus the gear measures as you erroneously  implied above...

 If i could posted again the 8 articles i posted and if you read them you will understand what they all have in common : the way human hearing work....

We are in the core of an acoustics revolution right now not only  with applied acoustics revolutionary products for all from DSP but more importantly in our own understanding of hearing and music and speech...This is what interest me the most. 

it is not that Amir must spend more time on auditory science, he cannot do this without reverse his course and his stance about human hearing abilities, workings, and power. He will never do that.It will kill his marketing.

The only time Amir spoke about auditory science is like James Randi debunking psychic abilities and ghosts for the same reasons: negating they exist.

Thanks Amir in the name of all  for your verification of design specs which may be useful for sure. No thanks Amir i refuse your ideology, your claims that your measures said it all and nothing else. This sentence resume my opinion about Amir.

@mahgister Fair enough (I think!) I do recall reading through a couple of your papers on hearing and psychoacoustics (at least one I was familiar with which was a long-form overview of human auditory systems).

There may be a disconnect, though, in the focus on how to apply psychoacoustics and acoustics in the reproduction of music. For instance, we know about ideas like masking and frequency binning, as well as nonlinear properties of hearing, but what we are primarily doing in reproducing music is trying to achieve fidelity to the original sources. We can do important things like room correction, binaural processing, DSP, to try to compensate for the limitations at the headphone/speaker/room level. There is also the amazing mathematics for spatial representations that we are now becoming accustomed to.

So is your complaint that ASR and Amir don’t spend enough time discussing these topics that you consider more relevant to auditory science and spend too much time on equipment? Is that your beef?