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?
one minute you are an expert in engineering, one minute you are an expert in accounting. That is quite the skill set.
Bizarre gaslighting. I’ve claimed neither.
If ASR / Amir were to start selling the devices, than [sic] you could claim it was a gift.
Bizarre logic. A gift is received. Subsequent sale has no bearing at all.
As ASR sells nothing, markets nothing, it would be a hard stretch to consider the units sent as "input" to their end product.
Their end product is published testing, a supply of review units could certainly be considered an input. But I didn’t state that, my expertise is legal/regulatory (not accounting) and I said—correctly—material consideration. My recommendation was not that they shouldn't accept review units, but that they operate transparently—declaring gift vs loan and maintaining a register of the former. What they do is their business of course, but how I regard their unusual ethical claims is mine.
So 55 steps down now, 201 to go. Don’t expect me to follow along though, your journey is your own. 😉
@axo1989, this is just one of many posts where you are trying to put forth that you have technical chops,
The part I asked you to respond to was your statement that my "takeaway" after amplifier listening was contrary to audio (and psycho-acoustic) research. The points I re-iterated were quite sound, but I was interested in your counterpoint (as opposed to your talking points).
But by your own admission, you are just legal/regulatory, and the comment I made w.r.t. to "gift" is tax law, which does not seem to be your forte. I don't think I have seen any other reviewer clearly say whether the reviews were loan, load with discount to buy, etc. so your attack, again, is specious, and given they don't accept advertising, they are already many steps above others from an optics stand point.
Still waiting on those youtube links. I already expected they did not exist or did not say what you claim, but now I am rather more sure.
w.r.t the gift, arguably, the review that Amir provides, assuming the product is technically competent, is of far more value, monetarily, to the company that provides the product, so the concept of "gift" is questionable, not just from an accounting standpoint, but a logic standpoint, and even a dictionary definition standpoint.
this is just one of many posts where you are trying to put forth that you have technical chops
"The part I asked you to respond to was your statement that my "takeaway" after amplifier listening was contrary to audio (and psycho-acoustic) research. The points I re-iterated were quite sound, but I was interested in your counterpoint (as opposed to your talking points)."
Bizarre gasllighting again: you interpret a considered opinion to be a claim to a technical qualification?
But by your own admission, you are just legal/regulatory
Reading comprehension: I certainly didn’t say "just" I said "not accounting".
the comment I made w.r.t. to "gift" is tax law
Moving the goalposts: material consideration and any conflict of interest arising isn’t tax law, it’s transparency (which is important to regulatory and trade practice law).
they are already many steps above others from an optics stand point.
Whataboutism—"what about those other reviewers, hey?"—is a logical fallacy, obviously. ASR makes special claims to ethical behaviour, I’m recommending transparency to support those claims. Interpreting this as "an attack" is typical of the defensiveness from ASR that many here experience and commented on. As noted, the moderator who did this in the ASR thread apologised. That’s open to you here also.
the review that Amir provides ... is of far more value, monetarily, to the company that provides the product, so the concept of "gift" is questionable
I give you something, you give me something. Absolutely a material consideration. And as you describe it, now you are supporting the material consideration argument and suggesting a quid pro quo! You have no idea what you are saying, do you? 😂
@tonywinga My first turntable was a Dual 1209 and a 1960s tube Kenwood receiver! I was 13 years old. I had tubes with cages to protect against my young daughter (vice versa).
My last 31 years, I've had a dedicated pair listening rooms with closed doors because for 24 years I have used high voltage uncaged tube amps with top caps (.6P7S - 6BG6 G Beam Tetrode power tubes). Only my wife and I turn the amps on/off and the cats who occasionally enter with us ignore the equipment (sleep in front of the speakers).
@kota1 I have gone to revival movie theaters to view 30s and 40s movies from safety prints where I experienced close to what audiences saw when they were new. I have two 4K 75" Sony LCD TVs which are were top models 3 and 5 years ago and are quite nice still. Too bad I haven't combined the audio and video rooms together (I use a Yamaha CR620 receivers hooked up to a pair of MB Quart 980S and ADS L620s). Eventually, I will replace the MB Quart with Legacy Signature IIIs.
@crymeanaudioriver Note fellow Audiogon posters, this member signed up to annoy us on this forum, much like the lectures from Amir. He is a regular on ASR. Try to ignore him (unlike ASR where trying to ignore someone who is not a follower of all things Amir gets you defamed and booted).
@fair -- All that typing, and all that work, but not even a minute of research to understand why a resistive load is used for amplifier testing.
"Cute", isn't it? A typical example of a "gentlemanly" statement considered normal at ASR these days.
It took me a bit longer to understand this item. I think I spent almost 30 minutes, but now I am comfortable with the answer.
At this point a replying person usually goes into explaining what relevant educational, professional, and life experiences he had over prior 30 years to come to his understanding of the issue at hand. I know better now. I won't.
I also know now that everyone uses resistors for testing including Stereophile. Stereophile has a simulated speaker load, but this measurement provides no additional information that cannot be ascertained in other measurements.
This is emotionally a very strong, and technically a very wrong statement. For details, please see:
I quickly found at least 6 and probably there are many more discussions on using complex loads for amplifier testing on ASR. I had to Google to understand some of the terms, but I muddled through. Even the stronger proponents of complex load testing, after the discussion progressed, agreed it was of limited and would only be valuable with an extreme speaker and a marginal amplifier.
I did such search too, yet got quite different results. There are a number of threads where the issue comes up, yet remains unresolved. For instance:
One thread, dedicated to the subject, appears to be expressing virtually all conceivable points of view, yet it is inconclusive as well. Also, quite a few replies there were redacted: one can see quotations from them and references to them, but not the original replies in their entirety.
I thank you for encouraging me to look into this as I sort of understood it, but had not delved deep enough. It was a less complex topic than I was expecting.
Here we differ too. As technical as the dedicated ASR discussion thread was, it didn't touch on stochastic behavior of non-linear time-dependent systems, of which a practical multi-transducer loudspeaker is a prime example.
Attaching such a system to an approximately linear, approximately time-independent power amplifier leaves the combined system still non-linear and time-dependent.
The math describing non-linear time-dependent systems is far more sophisticated than the one underlying the simple measurements that Amir uses.
Providing strings of measurements that all demonstrate factors beyond anything that can be heard by anyone or have any effect whatsoever on the sound that can be heard is totally futile, making decisions on such data is totally ridiculous.
A lot of trash in this collection of articles unfortunately. Interesting that you linked to the specific article on the power cube. They say in that article,
We do not perform such separ- ate IM distortion tests here because they characterize the same nonlinearities identified by the THD tests. A non- linearity that gives rise to a high 20 kHz THD will also cause inband distortion products in a multitone test. A full-scale 20 kHz test has the advantage that it has the maximum rate of change of any inband test signal and it characterizesbotheven-andodd-ordernonlinearities [Borbely 1989], [Jung 1979]. Transient intermodulation effects [Otala 1970] are also covered in this test.
I assume you agree with all that written above as well, or only what suits you?
The article you link talks, often, about the performance of the current limiter inside the amplifier. If the amplifier is running into a current limit, it is clipping. If you are running your amplifier into clipping, then you are beyond the limits of the amplifier.
Note the only example they show of oscillation, the issue yielded by non-resistive tests, shows oscillation occurring at 2 ohms, 60 degrees, and 1 ohm 30 and 60 degrees. This is important as it relates back to this article on ASR you linked:
This specific issue is discussed, as they talk about how many speakers have both very low impedance and very large phase shift. The conclusion is very few. Hence why the consensus that resistive testing into low enough impedance is sufficient. Elsewhere there is a call to include 2 ohm testing which I think I have seen on some more recent tests. It is probably important to identify from the articles linked that the worst issues are with tube amplifiers, lauded by audiophiles and rarely tested by ASR. When they are, the result is not positive.
The other threads you posted from ASR are primarily not technical discussions about testing, but more banter from what appears to be the less technical members. Not everyone on ASR is technical.
Also, quite a few replies there were redacted: one can see quotations from them and references to them, but not the original replies in their entirety.
If you are going to participate in a thread putting down a web site you should probably learn how that site works, or at least the "Click to expand" button. There is nothing redacted. The forum has a very good quote and reply system unlike another one I am thinking of.
Here we differ too. As technical as the dedicated ASR discussion thread was, it didn't touch on stochastic behavior of non-linear time-dependent systems, of which a practical multi-transducer loudspeaker is a prime example.
Attaching such a system to an approximately linear, approximately time-independent power amplifier leaves the combined system still non-linear and time-dependent.
The math describing non-linear time-dependent systems is far more sophisticated than the one underlying the simple measurements that Amir uses.
At first, that appears to be a lot to unpack. However, it can quickly be taken as a deflection. The topic at hand is the test of amplifiers. Specifically in this case resistive testing.
Attaching such a system to an approximately linear, approximately time-independent power amplifier
This negates all the other words used in the last paragraph. By your admission, the amplifier is time independent, approximately at least. That a speaker is not, is not relevant to the discussion. The only relevance would be if speakers drifted from a maximum of 30 degrees phase shift to 60 degree when they got hot and this is not identified in the ASR discussion linked. Is that what you are claiming?
Providing strings of measurements that all demonstrate factors beyond anything that can be heard by anyone or have any effect whatsoever on the sound that can be heard is totally futile, making decisions on such data is totally ridiculous.
@henry53the only way to interpret your statement above is that ASR is measuring to sufficient accuracy to far exceed human hearing. In a PM, you also stated -80db IMD is also inaudible, so that further supports a claim that ASR is measuring well beyond audibility. Can we assume the same is true of their noise measurements?
The concept of preference has been raised many times in this topic and even Amir has said he is not here to tell you your preference. He did state that it was in your best interests to take into consideration the results when he tests, and his tests show no change. I think USB cables, and power conditioners were in that statement and likely others. @henry53, are you saying you agree with ASR, at least in this instance? Or are you staying there are as yet undiscovered tests, which Amir is not doing. If so, can you allude to what those tests may be?
The Boxem Arthur 4222 mono amp was tested to 2 Ohm. I'm not sure what tests aren't relevant to audible sound. Distortion and THD+N certainly are as well as FR to power. Perhaps you don't understand what all can be measured and how it relates.
@djones51 it is easier to throw stones than make a meaningful argument. That is why they throw stones at me. I only entered the topic as the behavior was so poor. @henry53 admits that the ASR measurements provide enough resolution that they are beyond audible limits, but appears to be claiming they must make some other unknown test. For a cable, especially a digital cable, or power conditioner tested by measuring the whole system I can't imagine what that is. The tests are extensive. I am not an engineer but it is obvious that all those complaining are not either.
When ASR fanboys (stooges?) feel the need to keep posting propaganda it is not about ASR, it is about trying to denigrate and flame anything and everything, This is the ASR culture today and former members of ASR have already confirmed that in this thread (thank you by the way). Their borg queen tried coming here and he basically self destructed already through senseless, defenseless and relentless spamming. All they are doing is proving what the OP initially said, over and over.
Going back to the days when NAD's amplifiers were designed by the late Björn Erik Edvardsen, I have always been impressed by the company's conservative and competent engineering. The NAD C 298 continues that tradition but, with its "Eigentakt" class-D output modules, sets a new standard for combining very high power with supremely low distortion.—John Atkinson
Some of you need to climb out of your bubble. It's a whole new world out there. European companies large and small are pushing the envelope especially in speaker design, class D amps, active DSP controlled full systems.
Not what this thread is about Mr Jones. Never was. I own several Class D amplifiers. This was about Amir and ASR.
Some of you need to climb out of your bubble. It's a whole new world out there. European companies large and small are pushing the envelope especially in speaker design, class D amps, active DSP controlled full systems
AMR continues to make measurements that appear extremely accurate but have no reference whatsoever to audible sound.
I don't see how that is an accurate account of what ASR is doing.
The whole point of the measurements are always with respect to the audible consequences, or not, of those measurements. The speaker measurements for instance arose BECAUSE of how they have been correlated to audible differences in speaker design. Amir often explains the audible consequences of the measurements, and also listens and reports any relevant audible consequences.
If you mean to reference their measurements of things like SINAD, then once again, it's all in the context of audibility - that is, "will this be audible?" and the answer can be yes or no depending on the measurement. A lot of the SINAD differences are in to the inaudible range, but that's the point - ensuring they are in the inaudible range.
I agree that it can look a bit silly to keep chasing ever greater SINAD numbers once we are well in to the inaudible range. However, in the bigger picture, the fact the measurements allow us to know the gear in question has distortion elements that are inaudible is the main point.
@profI wonder if many of the people participating in this topic will realize that what they are writing, the way they write it, and how they misrepresent ASR, Amir and measurements in audio, will not be perceived by many who read this as a definitive debunking of ASR, but as a definitive debunking of their own beliefs?
again, the idea that a handful of measurements conducted by the members of one site somehow invalidates the actual musical listening experiences of generations of listeners just seems kind of absurd. you can learn a lot from measuring gear, but how that translates into "what sounds good" is where things get murky. i can go to ASR right now and say "rogue sphinx is a killer little amp for the money. ive owned it and it rules. trust your ears" and people who have never even heard one will immediately score points off me because it measured "bad". like buddy, try it and then there might be a conversation. otherwise you’re just repeating someone else’s argument
also, axo1989 posted links to some contentious threads there and i recommend checking them out - despite how some of those fellas speak to others, fundamental issues like "what to measure" are far from settled
again, the idea that a handful of measurements conducted by the members of one site somehow
Several pages of measurements.
Decades of scientific experiments.
Lack of scientific studies to prove otherwise, or demonstrations that have anything approaching scientific validity.
fundamental issues like "what to measure" are far from settled
Concerning DACs, interconnect cables, power cables, and to simplify, anything before the output of an amplifier, I have seen no evidence that it has not been settled.
Amplifiers and how they may interact with a speaker? There is room to explore extreme ends of products. I am not aware that the challenge that two amplifiers with low distortion, high damping, and matched frequency response withing 0.1db has been broken yet.
Speakers? There is no one that claims measurements of speakers are settled or will ever be settled.
It is fine to make claims, but it is good to have data other than your personal feeling, the feelings of others, and the marketing sheet to back it up.
One thing just struck me. As passionate as the people in this thread are that ASR is wrong, I see no effort to prove ASR wrong. You have all the tools you need. Your ears, and your systems. All you need is an impartial person to run an experiment and record the results. You probably need someone with a more scientific bent to set up the experiment, but it is not very hard. I raise the point before. I am sure the users at ASR would be thrilled to help you set up an experiment.
I don't expect any of you to do it though. I cannot do it. It is too easy to say I am biased if I hear no difference. You are biased to find a difference.
There was a head phone amplifier reviewer on Youtube, somewhat respected, that claimed with 100% certainty he could tell two amplifiers apart. Someone challenged and he took up the challenge. I applaud his willingness to be public about the result. The result? In a blind test, he could not tell the amplifiers apart. Not at all.
Thought the net result had to be repeatable, verifiable.
I can tell the difference in the 6 amplifiers I own and the speakers, blind tested and verified by my cat.
There was a head phone amplifier reviewer on Youtube, somewhat respected, that claimed with 100% certainty he could tell two amplifiers apart. Someone challenged and he took up the challenge. I applaud his willingness to be public about the result. The result? In a blind test, he could not tell the amplifiers apart. Not at all.
I do not trust @crymeanaudioriver opinion(s). ASR site is replete with anecdotes and foolish statements concerning cables, especially digital cables. I've tried half a dozen digital cables and none of them sound the same, not even close. I bet they measure the same though, 75 ohms, similar capacitance, resistance, inductance although I have no tests proving that other than a voltmeter. I decided based on listening. None of the cables had specs although five had extensive explanations concerning their construction.
I am very interested in hearing Atma-Sphere GaNFET and AGD Productions GaNTube amplifiers. I've heard a few Class D amps that sounded very good at audio shows, better than many solid state A/B amps, especially high powered older SS. I suspect they measure well even if they don't measure "perfect". ASR hasn't measured an AGD amp (probably too expensive). Both of my custom built tube amps sound better than the Atma-Sphere tube amps but the latter are very good (and very hot running). Who knows, Atma-Sphere states that the new Class D amp sounds better than his tube amps. I'd like to hear both his and AGD's.
@henry53 admits that the ASR measurements provide enough resolution that they are beyond audible limits, but appears to be claiming they must make some other unknown test. For a cable, especially a digital cable, or power conditioner tested by measuring the whole system I can't imagine what that is. The tests are extensive. I am not an engineer but it is obvious that all those complaining are not either.
Yes I am a forensic Engineer BSc(Hons) C.Eng. M.I.E.E M.I.Prod.E to be exact. A great portion of my career investigating accidents including being on a Royal Commission as a crown investigator in Australia on one of the most significant accidents ever to occur. As such I deal with evidence every day. As per above and continuously in this discussion I am quoted as saying things never said or even implied. In this instance regarding some "unknown" test. What I have said to concise and clear AMR frequently users totally useless data to draw even more useless conclusions.
So @henry53, MIEE, industrial engineering. Quick perusal indicates very little in the way of electrical engineering in that study. Light on related physics as well. I should have been more clear, but it should have been obvious. Obviously none of us are electrical engineers or close enough to speak with authority. I would have settle for a strongly related physics degree. I expect my PhD/MD is as relevant, and significantly more relevant on the research side. Are we all happy now?
In this instance regarding some "unknown" test. What I have said to concise and clear AMR frequently users totally useless data to draw even more useless conclusions.
You have neither proven the uselessness of ASR testing, nor have you provided alternatives. A simple question for you @henry53, if testing of a cable by ASR, say a simple interconnect, in a typical system (nothing their systems are not made of expensive components), reveals that by all the measurements they do, there is no change, and in both cases, everything tested is well below acceptable audible limits, do you believe that cable will have no audible impact? Yes or No?
You claim totally useless data. However I note in their testing:
Noise levels: Noise is relevant, audible, and can be distracting for some. At high volumes, even low noise levels, can audible.
THD: @djones51noted above they are now testing down to 2 ohms impedance, and a quickly check shows many different frequencies. Apparently it is full sweep from very low power to full power or low signal level to high signal level. Many audiophiles who like tubes claim they are more linear at low signal levels. This test should cover that concern adequately.
IMD: Reading their test protocol, this is done at 32 different frequencies. Do you not agree this would be a reasonable simulation of music? Audiophiles often write that IMD is more important, or that higher harmonics of distortion are important. Would this test not reveal all of that quickly?
Jitter: For DACs, jitter is injected on serial cables and how well the DAC rejects jitter is measured. Jitter is also measured for all the inputs. I could probably find a thousand comments on this forum alone about the importance of low jitter. Are you claiming it is not important?
AC Harmonics: Using very very distorted AC on inputs to DACs and amps to measure the effects. I would find a similar 1000 comments on importance of AC power on this forum. Do you not agree?
Speakers?: Far more tests than I have seen from any publication or website on speakers. When I read the discussions that follow, all of it seems not only relevant, but all of it can be translated into physical aspects of how the speaker will sound and how it may work out in your room. Is this not all useful?
I keep pushing the limits of my knowledge responding, but I don't see others pushing themselves to learn more. Your comment about useless data does not appear warranted. I have also asked you, what critical data that defines how something sounds is missing since you feel all the data they collect now is useless. Can you not answer this question?
I had to look that up. I have never had Mochi stuffed with ice cream. This is standard, in a tub fare in the freezer section. I was trying to find it on their website, but it is not there.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
