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

@axo1989

Nice post of yours directly above this one.

Re the quoted one, thanks. I think I first posted there around Christmas time. I read reviews a few years prior. Didn’t find your user name but give me a clue and I’ll follow up :-) Best to avoid heavy baggage I agree.

I’ve often been treated like a "subjectivist-in-wolf’s-clothing" on ASR. But that’s usually from the small cadre of "the usual suspects. " So there is certainly some inflexible thinking going on, and some are triggered by any appeal to subjectivity or subjective descriptions.   (In fact at one point it was suggested that I should continually declare that I reviewed speakers for a little while, 20 years ago, so that everyone could view my arguments with the proper amount of suspicion and by association with the reviewer crowd my honesty should be suspect...)

As I think you've seen I am often arguing against that type of mindset just as I do about a "purely subjectivist" mindset here.

But there is a lot of common ground and agreement with many others and on the whole I find the forum agreeable.   Same with people here.

@djones51 

I have seen this stated more than once "Science is observation then measurement". It's not really how it works,  it would be "verifiable observation". Science has no interest in measuring every non verified observation. ...

Verifying observations a priori isn't scientific though. We develop theoretical knowledge by observation, hypothesis and experimentation in that order.

Initial observation is how we come up with hypothesis in the first place. If you filter observation based on pre-existing theory you can't form new hypotheses. The science is in comparing the prediction of the hypothesis to the result of the experiment.

Of course, myths survive partly because falsifying non-existent things is tricky. I'm not going too far down that rabbit hole this morning.

nonoise, your response was, as usual, strewn with strawmen.

Sometime when you really want to interact with what has been argued, we are here for conversation.

prof, sounds like something a Crusader would say as he marches to retake the holy lands. No doubt they were quite talkative about it.

All the best,
Nonoise

@nonoise and @tantejuut  That's what I have been posting here.  If it is a subtle difference, then yes, my senses can be wrong.  If it is a DRAMATIC difference, not only can my friends with golden hearing, my very educated hearing but also totally equipment uninterested friends and family members can hear the differences.  I invite friends over and they exclaim how wonderful the music sounds (meaning reproduced).  If it weren't for time limits, they would stay all day (2-3 hours is usual).  Covid killed 1.5 years of friends coming over). 

To a few posters today, everything I say is anecdotal and has no relevance because I didn't do blind A/B/X testing to determine the measured differences.   Is that what this hobby (obsession for listening to music) is about?  Maybe it is for some but not for the overwhelming majority of music listeners who are overwhelmingly not audiophiles either.  

Now I think I will begin another forum concerning manufacturers supplying measurements and testing.  WHY DON'T THEY?  

@axo1989  in audio we are well beyond the observation and hypothesis stage. However you are wrong or at least simplifying. The hypothethis may be as simple as you are hearing things. The scientific side of audio has already stated that and tested it often. The I believe my hearing crowd simply refuses to test their hypothesis that what they hear actually is there. Hence it remains a hypothesis for them and them alone.   Unfortunately based on a available evidence even if proven they don't hear what they think they hear I don't think they will accept the results. See my Carl Jung quote.

My new forum posted as: 

Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?

@crymeanaudioriver

in audio we are well beyond the observation and hypothesis stage. However you are wrong or at least simplifying. The hypothethis may be as simple as you are hearing things. The scientific side of audio has already stated that and tested it often. ...

In terms of general audio theory theory, much is established—I doubt we’ll be discovering parallel universes there—in terms of psycho-acoustics a great deal also. But sonic observations of new speakers happen all the time. And "you are hearing things" is an inadequately worded hypothesis, we have to be more specific.

@mikepowellaudio 

RE I had to weigh in as this is too hard to resist....

Excellent post!

fleschler,

Here is my own approach to these questions:

Nobody is being force to become engineers or do scientific or blind tests when evaluating equipment. Nor should they be.

But it’s still the case that many of us want to know what is true...or LIKELY...or not in regard to claims about audio gear, because there are so many different claims, and we care about how we spend our money and time.

So if I’m voicing skepticism about your results, you don’t have to do a thing. Just carry on. But I am giving my reasons for why I find the claims uncompelling.

So when you say if you hear dramatic results it suggests you must be hearing something real, unfortunately that’s not true. We really can imagine "dramatic" results. Just consider the astounding number of experiences people believe they’ve had, everything from alien abductions to becoming convinced they were part of satanic rituals when they were a child to utterly implausible alternative-medicine treatments that "worked" etc. If someone can imagine they were probed by an alien, you think an audiophile can’t imagine "less midrange glare or better dynamics?"

So I approach another audiophile’s claims not on the strength of his personal conviction, but on the plausibility of the claim. If someone is describing to me the differences he heard between Devore and Magico speakers...hey...TOTALLY plausible given that we know very well speakers differ in very audible ways. Could there be some bias infecting the claim? Of course. But as a practical matter, it’s reasonable to conditionally accept the claims of the sonic differences.

But if someone is declaring their new $1,000 USB cable has dramatically improved his system, deeper bass, bigger soundstage, more dynamics and all that...well that is a more implausible claim based on how digital signals work. I’m not going to demand THAT person make his decisions based on MY criteria, but I am going to explain why I would want stronger evidence than that person’s say-so, before I accept the claim. And I will defend why that is rational for me to do so.

So don’t mix up what I’m saying as a declaration you have to do anything different at all in your pursuit of gear. I am simply defending the reasons for skepticism. If you think those reasons are poor ones, then yeah that becomes central to the debate.

@mattw73

Do I make all my purchases because of high SINAD rating? No, but it helps as a starting point for certain types of gear I may be looking for. I have my own brain and I’m able to make my own decision on what sounds good to me without asking a hundred different people about what they thought about something I purchased.

Can you give an example of what that gear (you may be looking for) is that ASR helps you as a starting point in. It’s a bit confusing really. And where does the science come in, in measuring?

@prof Do you believe that power cables can exert different sonic sound to a system, or they are not capable of a difference or significant difference.

My enigineer friend’s example of Pangea power cable versus GroverHuffman power cable is based not only on subjective hearing but also knowing the manufacturing process of those cables. The Pangea lacks the current capability and isolation of the GroverHuffman cable. The latter has a triple powdered metal suspended in a glue for the RF/EMI shield encased in a silver shield and then in a faraday cage-like copper shield. It has 2 mil thick, embossed all copper elements in an air core dielectric which he owns a patent on. After trying Furutech, Oyide and several other high end connectors, some Taiwanese all copper connectors were chosen as they did not impart a "brighter" sound for their brass, silver and rhodium connectors. Luckily he found copper connectors which did not get loose over time and had excellent grip. I don’t know if they are OFC or 6N. It was also determined that using these off-brand connectors were cost effective and permitted the cables to be sold at a reasonable price (some Furutech connectors can cost as much as the rest of the cable components or more). Every component of his cables was selected from listening to the results of various materials.

Cut open a Pangea 9 SE Mk II cable and you’ll find Cardas Grade One Copper, OFC copper, and Litz wire copper conductors. Quote-Counter-spiraled conductors offer superior noise rejection, and the triple-shielded design provides high-current noise isolation. The large-diameter 7-AWG construction boasts seven-way multi-gauge geometry optimized for high-current delivery of 50/60 Hz AC power. The solid-blade 24k gold-plated copper AC contacts provide superior electrical contact end quote. The triple-shield is not very sophisticated and the counter spiral, Litz design could or may not be the reason for the poor sound. Regardless, at least I know what the physical differences in the cables are. The difference in sound was extreme with the Pangea ruining a very high end system of nearly $1/2 million.

I was ASR member since November 2018. It was different back then. We absolutely could and did have objectivists-subjectivists discussion threads like this one. Only without name calling. Learned a lot from each other in the process.

Got booted off ASR in fall of 2022. As far as I understood, for arguing with moderator about the degree of Fourier Transform math applicability to some of the gear evaluations Amir routinely does.

Things changed quite a bit in these almost four years. I agree with those characterizing the nowadays ASR moderators attitude as "Scientology", "Vulgar science", or "Popular science".

References to actual formulations and proofs of theorems, or peer-reviewed scientific papers, are no longer accepted as relevant. Only measurements in Amir-prescribed way.

How did it happen? Being somewhat of an ASR old-timer, I believe I have an insight. Back then, there also was a cadre of loud members. Yet we were all equal, with low "like"scores, and could compete on merit of our arguments.

Soon enough, we discovered that spending half a Saturday digging out originally recorded samples, processing them, doing A/B/X, and presenting ASR with raw data, processing protocol, and results, would yield maybe 5 likes.

However, quickly inserting a snide remark, typically at the expense of a new member, especially of a new subjectivist member, proved to be a sure way to score around 10 likes. And so the loud ones jumped on this bandwagon with both feet.

In about two years, one could observe an incredibly smart, experienced, and polite member, with 30+ years of professional experience in the field who would stand at about the same ASR rating as someone with opposing qualities yet really good at derogatory jokes.

Year three appeared to me as a tug-of-war between the two camps. I was usually subscribed to several of the more technical members. In year three they were posting less and less, and then most of them stopped posting. So did I.

Meanwhile, Amir was doing tons and tons of relevant testing, which I appreciated, and I supported him financially. In a way, ASR became by favorite audio consumer reviews paid online magazine, yet I no longer contributed to discussions.

We moved into a larger house this year, and I finally got an opportunity to have three rather different audio systems: for office, living room, and guest room. Some gear reshuffling and purchasing was in order.

Went back to several Web sites and Youtube channels, including ASR. The character of discourse on ASR was quite shocking. Tried to correct certain inaccuracies like I did in year 2020 (naive me!). Got booted out two days later.

As I understand, the loud ones are ruling ASR now. I can't make a blanket statement obviously, because I don't know all of the current moderators and those who reported me to the moderators. Yet things surely changed.

Quick look at the current status of some of the known old days loud members confirmed that they are "Technical Experts" and such now, factually deciding who stays on ASR and who goes. Online "social credit" experiment gone wrong I guess ...

Thank you for your valuable and insightful perspective, and welcome to a place that hopefully, you can feel comfortable posting. 

On an aside, have you recognized any of the "technical experts" posting here who've been running roughshod over the members back at ASR?

All the best,
Nonoise

Now I think I will begin another forum concerning manufacturers supplying measurements and testing.  WHY DON'T THEY?  

Embarrassment?

@fair 

Online "social credit" experiment gone wrong I guess ...

Interesting that it wasn't always that way. I noticed after joining there around Christmas time that new members with a neutral or subjectivist leaning could be criticised in almost any terms. I'm pretty ambidextrous on that divide but was attacked early on for being "nihilist" and "woke". Impressively oxymoronic! Responding didn't work out of course, as moderation is asymmetrical. Two-week ban from the thread. Later on I reported a couple of bigoted posts from a pair of high post count old timers with many 'likes'. Rookie mistake, earned me a two week holiday from the forum. These days, ASR is a self-confessed Nazi bar. Moderator claimed they didn't really want to shut down and erase an innocuous LBGTQ+ artist discussion thread, but couldn't manage the old-timer backlash. I'm sure they could have corrected the drift to intolerance, they just didn't want to hard enough.

Oh boy this thread really needs to die. 

Regarding the cables discussion. A couple of plausible theories, assuming that neither confirmation bias, nor slick salesman-induced hypnosis are at play.

(A) A cable is also an antenna.

I observed mobile phone interference with a studio monitor once. Manifested as a periodic crackle in one of the monitor's three transducers. Moving the phone from ~1 feet to ~3 feet from the studio monitor resolved the issue.

A well-shielded cable, especially with carefully twisted identical wires, is less of an antenna. Thus, at a location with a strong RF field, it could theoretically provide a protection from the interference, which could otherwise induce distortions.

To test this hypothesis, the cable and equipment would need to be moved and turned around, let's say several feet away and ninety degrees, to potentially change the interference effect.

(B) A cable is also a heat sink.

Imagine a thermally-challenged piece of equipment. Could be a compact tube apparatus. Or perhaps a vintage solid-state amplifier with a dried-out thermal paste between the power stage transistors and regular heat sink.

Massive enough cable, made of materials with high thermal conductivity coefficient, and with a tightly inserting connector (perhaps even slightly lubricated with electrically and thermally conductive paste), may cool off at least the power transformer coil to which the power supply wires are connected.

Cooled off power transformer coil would then "extract" heat from other transformer coils, which are connected to rectifier on the  printed circuit board, from transformer core, and so on.

Also, some heat could be extracted by convection from the air circulating inside the case shared by the transformer with other amplifier components, cooling down even components situated far from the transformer.

In effect, such a cable could serve as an auxiliary heat sink, analogous to a transmission cooling radiator on certain high-performance cars and trucks. The analogy extends to potential positive effect from increasing air flow around the auxiliary heat sink. In case of the cable, it could be achieved by lifting it off the ground.

To test this hypothesis, one would need to measure change in equilibrium amplifier temperature at the same settings and audio material with one cable vs another. The equilibrium temperature is the one that no longer rises, after some time since the test was started.

have you recognized any of the "technical experts" posting here who've been running roughshod over the members back at ASR?

No, I haven't. Thank you for the welcome.

@fair , the ham radio guys have how to videos on you tube on how to make antennas from speaker wire. What a waste of money to use junk cables on high end speakers, you flushed your speaker investment down the drain because those speakers will never perform to potential:

@fair - Welcome to my world and the Audiogon forum.  Very interesting theories on cable heat sink and antenna attributes which can be reduced or eliminated.  That's one of the reasons I read Audiogon forums.  

@djones51 Very likely.  Especially cable and tweak manufacturers. 

Mitch2 gives some examples why just in the specs on the other forum.  Problem is that even the ASR recommended speaker manufacturers don't reveal test measurements and rely on reviewers. Revel speakers typically measures great, why don't they publish their tests?  

@prof

"This is the deep irony/hypocrisy that almost always arises in these threads.

For the most part people making the "ASR-type case" are trying to offer a reasoned case with civility.  The ad hominem and insults, like above, tends to come from the "anti-objective" side...who then go on to blame the "objectivists" for being the dogmatic thread-crappers."

Not really prof. You and a few others who push the ASR line are polite and engage in interesting conversation and banter. Quite a few others are rude and objectionable and behave like yapping dogs. Amir himself is one of these. Another one accuses posters from this site as lying but has produced no evidence or quotes to back this up, Another one appears to deny the existence of a thread on ASR itself showing that 39% of Topping amp purchasers have problems.

I don't think anyone here is weird enough to push the line that a magic wood from the Amazon jungles will give you that special sound. However many of us do take the line that dacs do sound different and that perhaps a wonderfully measuring dac  pushed by Amir does not sound that great. It is these areas which cause exasperation and friction - when the ASR community says you are crazy for spending $x on A when B measures far better and is a better product.

Also I think Amir's iron fisted approach of throwing out everyone who disagrees with him is pretty rude and shows the sort of person he is. I feel sorry for him as he appears to need confirmation from his members and brooks no debate.

Most here are happy to discuss and debate with reasonable minded people.

@laoman - Yes. Exactly my feeling. 

I noted some overvalued and inconsequential examples of tweaks earlier in this forum that no one commented on. Of course they were commented on on ASR. My friends and I did hear the Shun Mook LP Clamp $5600. In that system which is high end, it did improve the sound but the system itself while exhibiting great resolution, dynamics, sweet tonal qualities was just fatiguing. Maybe it was too forward, in your face sound. I don’t remember exactly but it was too much! As to the clamp, we didn’t think it was worth the money. But I wouldn’t criminalize the manufacturer as defrauding the public as ASR members would probably concur to do.

I don't think anyone here is weird enough to push the line that a magic wood from the Amazon jungles will give you that special sound.

That's a keeper.

Our final word to those that yap should be to quote Jorge of Burgos:

Pedas per os tuum.

Our final word to those that yap should be to quote Jorge of Burgos:

Pedas per os tuum.

You (plural) are now speaking in tongues?  

I was more an objectivist long before ASR existed so it isn’t surprising to say I have learned a lot more from ASR than this one but I never really considered Audigon as a site to learn but a site to buy and sell and shoot the breeze on forums. Some of the discussions here are interesting but some are outright bizarre, for instance, colored fuses, exotic cabling, magic mats in mains panels to name a few. At any rate adios.

ASR can’t be bothered to listen to everything they measure. For that reason alone, I can’t be bothered with ASR and its agenda.

I like the threads here more than most other sites. Extremely seasoned contributors who openly share their wisdom without making you feel embarrassed or shamed. I don’t find that open mindedness and support anywhere else the way I find it here.

@laoman 

However many of us do take the line that dacs do sound different and that perhaps a wonderfully measuring dac  pushed by Amir does not sound that great. 

I was one of them who got banned because of this subject.  Amir seldom conducted listening test and it is no wonder every Dac sounds the same to him and his members.  There is no measurements existed today for such important sound traits as soundstages.  So without listening test there is no way to objectively and comprehensively assess the sound quality.  For example, I have purchased two Topping Dac based on the wonderful measurements BUT return / sell both because of the lack of soundstage depth and separation.  Some reviewers I trusted also commented about the Topping flagship D90SE sounds flat as well.

Also I think Amir's iron fisted approach of throwing out everyone who disagrees with him is pretty rude and shows the sort of person he is. I feel sorry for him ...

Same here but I won't describe him "iron fisted".  Maybe people outside the third world do not understand the gravity of the issue of censoring speech / opinions but I could tell you what he has done is not acceptable.  I have no regret of being banned other than feeling sorry for him.  I could still discuss technical subject with folks from several smaller forums and acquire satisfactory / constructive responses.

@juanmanuelfangioii has most advocated for censorship on these pages. The only one who spoke out against him is @prof and I. Others were very upset Amir was here. It seems censorship was just fine when it was censorship of those who disagreed.

I will put it in perspective so that some here can understand. There is an earth sciences site and astrophysics site. A flat earth believer goes to that site and claims the earth is flat. His evidence? His eyes clearly show it is flat. The members ask for more evidence. He provides none and keeps insisting his eyes don’t lie. They quickly turf him. Many of you who got turfed at ASR were flat earth followers visiting a science site. What did you expect?   This has nothing to do with free speech.

@cindyment ​​​@crymeanaudioriver not a flat earther and I also do not subscribe to the measurements tripe.

Really do not care. You claim you stood up to Amir and yet here you are defending the bullocks. 

I can't stay away. The thing that makes interesting reading is, interesting writing. Writers make good reading, not engineers. Writers that use their vast vocabulary and emotions to explain what they are hearing. That is helpful, although not 100% reliable. On the other hand, the guys on ASR can't say what something sounds like until they perform double blind tests with their control sample of buddies, not very useful. That is why their subjective reviews are one or two lines of not very descriptive words. 

Multiple people including myself experiencing a difference in sound using so called "magic wood" giving one "special sound" is not what I was stating.  That we heard a small improvement versus no clamp and some expensive metal clamp (maybe Stillpoints or Synergistic Research) in it's use was obvious, in that system in that room.  At that price, we all considered it (except for the owner of it) ridiculous.  Just like the DS Audio LP centering device.  Yes, it does work but at what cost in money, time and aggravation?  I consider both unnecessary tweaks.  

@djones51

I was more an objectivist long before ASR existed so it isn’t surprising to say I have learned a lot more from ASR than this one but I never really considered Audigon as a site to learn but a site to buy and sell and shoot the breeze on forums. Some of the discussions here are interesting but some are outright bizarre, for instance, colored fuses, exotic cabling, magic mats in mains panels to name a few. At any rate adios.

I didn’t get such a good start. I went into this hobby fairly clueless. I just wanted a system that sounded good to my ears.

I read magazines and built a knowledge base from that. I even got into the tweakery side once I become a little bored with my Rega/NAD based system.

I remember a fair bit of dabbling with cables, power supplies, speaker stands/spikes on screws, CD players, amplifiers, even putting a few CDs into the freezer overnight.

Eventually the realisation began to dawn upon me that the information I’d read in the magazines was more or less a complete work of fiction.

None of the above made any significant improvement to the sound I was getting. At best they were subliminal differences, nothing more.

Pro audio was always more science based but it never waxed lyrical about products the way domestic audio did. There was little or no fantasy, and being a subjectivist, I craved for that fantasy.

In some ways I still do, except I now understand that systems which are not adept at playing all genres are of little use to me. Those kinds of systems, despite many strengths, tend to have one or two serious flaws.

Sites like ASR will readily point out these serious flaws in a way that magazines will never do. That kind of information can prove invaluable in helping avoid seriously expensive mistakes. That kind of information will never be found in magazine reviews.

At best they are subjectivist entertainment, nothing more. At worst they are little more than a collusive practice with mutual benefits for the manufactures, dealers and reviewers.

Their victim is always the consumer. I should know. I’ve been there, time and time again.

Sites like ASR, Erin’s Music Corner and Archimago’s Musings as well as some Pro Audio publications can certainly help you avoid equipment with serious technical flaws.

There is a good reason why such sites are unpopular with many people, and it’s usually down to vested personal interests

Just look at the mountain of criticism given to blind listening tests and yet hardly a word said against the corresponding sighted tests??

I would implore even the most hardened subjectivist to take with them a wide variety of music with which to test products. You will learn next to nothing with the kind of well recorded instrumental jazz you hear at most shows.

That kind of Muzak does not reveal system weaknesses, it seeks to hide them. Even if that’s all you listen to, you know the old cliche of the audiophile with a million highly subjectivist dollar system who only plays 2 or 3 CDs etc.

Perhaps the best non measurements based test of all is the human voice. There’s a good video from Ditton Works below that tries to make the same point.

I don't know your backstory @cd318 mine is in the sciences. I fully admit I went through the same as you did. I probably spent a small fortune on audio magazines, tried all the tricks, etc.   I don't consider it a sign of weakness to admit I was mistaken. Is that why some are so ardent that they will not even challenge their own beliefs. They don't want to admit weakness?  Perhaps I could have related to it when I was younger, but today it is very foreign to me. It's a conscious decision to not grow.

@cd318

At best they are subjectivist entertainment, nothing more. At worst they are little more than a collusive practice with mutual benefits for the manufactures, dealers and reviewers.

Re "at worst" I agree. But "at best" they are informative descriptions of the sonic characteristics of the devices reviewed.

I’m not a former/converted subjectivist, however, so I don’t have recovery PTSD to contend with or commiserate over.

Anyone telling you an audio product sounds bad based solely on a THD of 0.003% compared to another product with 0.001% without even listening as to whether that has any effect is delusional. 

Anyone telling you an audio product sounds bad based solely on a THD of 0.003% compared to another product with 0.001% without even listening as to whether that has any effect is delusional. 

Are you implying that happens on ASR @henry53 ??  Haven't we had enough hyperbole and lying for one topic already?

But "at best" they are informative descriptions of the sonic characteristics of the devices reviewed.

How do you know they are that and not a reflection of a very nice or very poor aesthetic, or prior conditioning, or the ongoing fight with the spouse?

I too was taken with tweaky products and equipment. Luckily, most of them were only auditioned and returned. The biggest loss versus cost was a Muse Signature 9 SE CD player $3800, sold for $550 years later. Touted by my late audio dealer who was an expert in analog and had some very good product lines, I bought it and disliked it for a few 100 hours, then stopped listening to it. For some reason, it sounded like the beginning and ending transients were lopped off and the remote was a horror. I went back to listening to older Sony CD players and a new Marantz CD 63. Then the EAR Acute for 15 years.

As to tweaks, so many only made a subliminal difference I returned them as not worth it. When I moved into my new high end listening room, I removed the bandaid subtle "kitchen magnet" products from my system. They reduced dynamics and appeared to add distortion.

My favorite tweak is the Shakti Hallograph, an acoustic tweak. Not subtle at all.  It works wonders with my speakers but maybe won't be necessary with high end Von Schweikert speakers I want to eventually purchase with their great imaging, timing and soundstage coherence for very wide listening area. 

I have extensively read magazines, now internet sites, about audio equipment. I don’t believe most of them (especially cable reviews). My favorites were from J.Gordon Holt, but that was a long time ago. Today, with so many reviewers not using classical or jazz to audition equipment, I cannot get a sense of what the reviewer is hearing from a modern recording. I like when sound comparisons are made between multiple pieces of equipment.

I know that even many high end cable manufacturers do not state what the difference in sound will be using one or another of their cables. Synergistic Research, from Foundation to SRX, 6 lines of cable, what difference will I hear moving up or down? Ansuz cables-"the more transparent, holistic and authentic the resulting soundstage. The resulting sound is even more refined, more spacious and truly amazing." What does that tell me, that’s it’s just better? Masterbuilt cables-so little information that it is just based on their price. Yet I’ve heard these three lines sound great in high end systems. Maybe they only work well in those systems. Transparent, Audioquest, Cardas, Nordost, Crystal Cable, Shunyata, etc. etc. There is just too little information, all marketing and puffery. Many do give me a good idea about their construction such as SR. I want more information to try them, certainly don’t want to buy them without trying them.

@crymeanaudioriver

I agree with AXO1989’s comment.

How do you know they are that and not a reflection of a very nice or very poor aesthetic, or prior conditioning, or the ongoing fight with the spouse?

Generally I note whether a subjective reviewer is good at putting sound in to words - usefully! - and if I note his/her descriptions correlate very well with equipment I’ve owned or heard myself, then I gain some confidence that his observations can be useful. I also note reviewers who seem to care particularly about noting the things I care about, so I feel ’ok, this person listens like me, he’s listening for the same things, and he’s very good at detecting and describing them."

I have been led to quite a few wonderful products, parsing reviews in this way. I’ve also been amazed how perceptive and accurate some of their descriptions have been when they are describing speakers I’m familiar with.

In fact I was just reading an old review of the Devore O/93 speakers that I’ve auditioned numerous times and love, which also sound like the bigger O/96 that I like even more. I was bewitched by those speakers - they did something really special that stood out from all the other speakers I auditioned. And the reviewer nailed the way the Devores reproduced realistic organic timbre and density:

"A snare drum skin sounds exactly like a real snare drum skin. A cymbal crashes, splashes, sparkles, and has airborne sonic decay as if a drum kit is being played in front of me. A singer’s voice has chest resonance – not just throat vibration – which signals my brain to believe that vocal emanation is being projected by an organic, physical mass, just like a real singer standing in the room would sound."

Those words could have been taken right out of my head after my first audition of the Devore O-series speakers. The FIRST thing that hit me, as a fan of drums, was "man THAT sounds more like a real snare than I’ve heard anywhere!" Then I listened to one of my drum solo test tracks and was blown away by the sound of the cymbals. I’d rarely heard them that big, brassy, airy, splashy...so much like the real thing. The startling sensation of a "drum kit being played in front of me" stuck in my mind for weeks (having grown up with drums, played them, played in bands).  I was also struck by the way the Devores gave a sense of body and density to sounds missing in many other speakers...exactly as the reviewer pointed out.

So I can see this guy is caring about what I care about, listening for what I’m listening for, and his description (including most of the rest of the review) is bang on from what I took away from the Devore auditions.

The thing is, over on ASR the Devore speakers are just immediately dismissed because they immediately see "problems" with the design, that don’t fit the "harman kardon curve" school of design that is favored there. I would never, ever have been drawn to the Devores via that web site. It was subjective descriptions from other audiophiles and writers that kept hitting on certain themes about those speakers, which made me say ’these sound right up my alley.’

I could mention all sorts of subjective reviews that I found very accurate. (For instance Herb at Stereophile nailed the character differences comparing Harbeth and Joseph Audio speakers, both of which I have owned).

@prof Thank you for the lead. I forgot about this head to head speaker comparison. I heard the Joseph’s and the Harbeth 40.1s and Herb’s description is right on target. I prefer the Harbeth sound (possibly because I have over 10,000 opera/classical vocal LPs/CDs and 78s) for voice. Fortunately, my speakers are somewhere in the middle of these two with big, deep bass as well (six drivers/3 12" woofers each).  

Did you decide on the Devore O/96 because it was an amalgam of those two speakers that you previously owned? I only heard Devores (O/93 or O/96) under audio show conditions and while it was pleasant, it didn’t excite me (the room was very wide and I have no recollection of the other equipment). Your description makes me want to hear them again in a better setting.   All 3 speakers you own/owned are also moderately priced and as two ways, maintain excellent coherence and imaging. 

I have under 100 bongo jazz and pop LPs/CDs and 1000+ jazz recordings commonly featuring drums . As my equipment got better, I could also relate to hearing the skins and feeling the snap plus the shimmering of cymbals. Very exciting. I know what you’re feeling.

@crymeanaudioriver

I will put it in perspective so that some here can understand. There is an earth sciences site and astrophysics site. A flat earth believer goes to that site and claims the earth is flat. His evidence? His eyes clearly show it is flat. The members ask for more evidence. He provides none and keeps insisting his eyes don’t lie. They quickly turf him. Many of you who got turfed at ASR were flat earth followers visiting a science site. What did you expect?   This has nothing to do with free speech.

OK. I'll bite.

A member comes to ASR wanting to discuss how the Earth deviations from perfect spherical shape may affect a practical business project he is working on. Some background on this topic is below.

But, he is immediately attacked by some of the loud regulars, who are laughing at him for not knowing that Earth is a perfect sphere, and there is nothing further to discuss. Their chiding comments gather numerous likes. 

The member persists, providing references to peer-reviewed scientific papers, and explaining logical reasons why Earth can't possibly be a perfect sphere. The chiding comments are now turning into outright character assassination attempts.

The member is then compelled to protect his reputation. He reduces the discussion to a very simple statement, asking the loud regulars to comment on it. The loud regulars reply, demonstrating their lack of both knowledge and logical thinking.

One would think, OK, the member earned his right to be taken seriously. But no! No no no! The loud regulars report him to a moderator - I guess one of them, who earned his likes points mostly through chiding others. And here comes the ban.

Obviously, Amir sees that. He knows what's going on. Why doesn't he put an end to that? My best guess is that because Amir is an experienced Microsoft executive, who knows how to use others to take down those who could damage his standing.

Amir needs these loud regulars, so that they could take down those inconvenient members who are asking "wrong" questions and are bringing in "wrong" information.

Amir employs other stratagems of corporate politics as well: badmouthing other prominent audio gear reviewers behind their backs is one of those. I guess it must have worked well for him during his previous career.

On the surface, he is winning, getting his way in shaping ASR the way he wants it to be. In a broader sense, he is losing. Losing members, self-tarnishing his reputation, and making his enterprise non-monetizable. This saddens me.

One example of why ASR has become non-monetizable. Amir decided to test power amplifiers only on purely resistive load. While he is relatively careful with legalese, he did make purchasing recommendations based on such tests.

"Inconvenient" members repeatedly asked Amir why wouldn't he test power amplifiers on a more realistic load: either on a well-known widely available speaker, or on a professional-grade speaker simulator.

Correspondingly, some of the power amplifiers Amir recommended, per other "inconvenient" members reports, performed significantly worse with real-life speakers compared to the amplifiers he deemed "not engineered well".

I believe this resulted in commercial losses for producers of undeservedly downrated amplifiers. Also, to reputation losses, resulting losses in employment opportunities, and monetary losses, for designers of these amplifiers.

While Amir, if we are to believe him, doesn't make profit on his reviews, suing him would be complicated. He could just maintain that those were honest rookie mistakes of a hobbyist.

However, the moment he tries to seriously monetize ASR, for instance through selling it to another corporation, or via taking in non-trivial ads money, he would be open to lawsuits from likes of Yamaha and others, whose flagship amplifiers he alleged were designed incompetently.

.

@fair +10  I knew about the centrifugal forces which create a "bulge" in the earth's center since the 1970s.  It is considered an oblate ellipsoid rather than a perfect sphere according to scientists.  Arguing against that is considered like stating the earth is flat.  The latter statement of the earth ASR members agree on.  The former statement of the earth, apparently they do not.  And are they nasty denying it without any facts I bet in their denunciation.  Hence, I will not rejoin ASR under a fake name as it doesn't matter after my rude introduction and banishment by Amir.  

May they keep their religion far away from us.  

@crymeanaudioriver Many of you who got turfed at ASR were flat earth followers visiting a science site. What did you expect?

Its all rather odd, perhaps confined to American culture, because I have not seen this level of self pity anywhere else..

Like if a bloke walks into the women’s shower room and is not only surprised when he is booted out, but then goes onto pontificate at the standards observed in their shower room and the poor quality of nakedness he observed.

It is really nothing to write home about in terms of asr’s audio gears testing. Audioholics and Erin’s Audio Corner could do and actually were doing better jobs. Their recommendations are found more objective and thrustworthy because, as Stereophile does, they complement the measurements with critical listening in great length to give more comprehensive assessment. That covers not only the traditionally available measurement matrices but also important sound traits that can not be measured today such as soundstages and other psychoaccoustic elements. If asr/Amir proclaims you are the better scientific guys, prove it.

@henry53 "...an audio product sounds bad based solely on a THD of 0.003% compared to another product with 0.001% ..."

@crymeanaudioriver "...Haven't we had enough hyperbole and lying for one topic already?..."

Correct me if I'm wrong but THD is part of the SINAD formula, I think. So wouldn't a higher THD number put it further down the list on the SINAD chart. Isn't the whole idea of SINAD to rate sound quality? 

@fleschler +1 "Now I think I will begin another forum concerning manufacturers supplying measurements and testing"

that would be great, please do!