2. tech-talk
  3. 1332143340

How much can be measured -- and how much cannot?

There has been a lot of discussion over the years on Audiogon regarding the measurement of components and other audio products. Some people claim everything is either measurable now or will one day become measurable with more sophisticated measuring equipment. But others say there are things in high end audio that will never me measurable and that measurements are really not that important.

Here is a typical example -- a quote taken from the Stereophile forum regarding their review of the Playback Designs MPS-5:

"JA 2/17/10 Review Measurements of Playback Designs MPS-5
Posted: April 13, 2011 - 8:42am

John Atkinson's 2/17/10 review measurements of the Playback Designs MPS-5 revealed less than stellar technical performance even though Michael Fremer really liked the player. I've included JA's closing measurement remarks below followed by the manufacturer's comments.

To my knowledge there was never any followup in Stereophile regarding the manufacturers reply the MPS-5 could not be adequately measured with traditional measurement techniques.

I believe Stereophile should respond to this reply in the interests of its own measurements credibility.

Len"

How important do you think measurements are? Are the ears really the only true arbiter?
sabai
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Spinaker01,
This is a very good point that you make:

"A speaker that measures bad never sounds good, but conversely a speaker that measures good does not ALWAYS sound good.(but stands a better chance of sounding good)..."

Knowing a speaker's measurements and knowing how to interpret them may allow us to avoid making a costly buying error.
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,230 posts
 
"the complete nature of the resulting sound still cannot be known until heard regardindless"
Exactly! when all is said and done you still 'must' rely on your ears to judge the sound quality.I don`t believe we disagree on this conclusion.
Regards,
tbg
5,263 posts
 
And around and around we go. In all cases where JA didn't like much in measuring and Fremer liked the component I have always agreed with Fremer. A classic example was the WAVAC SH-833 monoblock amps. Fremer loved it as did I on risking hearing something I could not afford as CES. Atkinson panned it and it does look pretty awful. My conclusion is that we can measure what is not important to what we hear.
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Onhwy61,
You state: "We can trade opinions, but our belief systems, which I believe are marketing driven, prevent us from being educated, at least to some large extent."

Some of how we hear may sometimes be marketing driven -- for some people. But our brains are wired for music, the same as they are wired for language and the same as they are wired for enjoying beautiful things. Marketing is only a small part of how we perceive music and the extent to which we enjoy music. IMO. This is a highly complex matter where many individual factors contribute, as well the collective unconscious playing an important role. IMO.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,139 posts
 
When I say marketing one of the concepts I'm referring to is that only through the meticulous selection of and then synergistic mating of equipment can audio satisfaction be attained. I suspect some people will find the last sentence nonsensical. And it could be, but have you ever had a moment of musical bliss when listening via clearly non-audiophile equipment? It happens to me all the time and I think it's because music and the emotions I bring to listening to music trumps the quality of equipment I'm using. Has all the knowledge each of us learned in our individual audiophile journeys actual conditioned us to enjoy music less if not reproduced via high end equipment? If so are you really better off than when you started?
More to discover