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?
This is tremendous information that you share. I, and perhaps other contributors on this thread, thankyou for sharing your profound epiphany at having found someone with a physics education after having visited every stereo shop in SoCal. |
| Post removed |
Except @jerryg123 , you wrote this title, "Everything matter in the audio chain. Tests prove it!" which was your personal declaration. If you are not an expert, how do you feel qualified to make this declaration? |
I was very lucky. As a young audiophile, I visited every stereo shop in SoCal listening for the shop that had the best sound. I found it at Woodland Stereo, the shop that helped Arnie develop the Servo Static and other loudspeakers. I got to listen to the products and hear about the problems. By far the best sound in SoCal. I didn’t need a DBT to hear the difference, they were head and shoulders above the rest. Arnie had the education (Physics) and the ear to make extraordinary sounding loudspeakers. And I got a glimpse of it all as the products were tested and improved at the shop that I bought my gear from. |
@crymeanaudioriver I am not the one who claims to be an expert. Nor do I purport to be an expert with a web site named Audio Science Review. I simply shared information from the those Dutch fellas. So please do not tag me again as it has pointed out the emperor has no clothes. |
Those are quite astonishing statistics. I am actually very careful to only buy from vendors who do not offer any marketing guarantees as to their generous return policy. . Think. |
@jerryg123 you have created a topic where you claim that the Alpha Audio cable test presents new data. There is nothing new, just the resistance of cables which was always known, and which I see being discussed many many times. How do you reconcile your lack of knowledge in this area with your attack or Amir above? |
@russ69 +1, Nudell on trickle down tech: Nudell: At Infinity we started with a very expensive speaker, the Servo Statik, and brought some of the technology down to lower price levels. We've found that some of the most successful companies, be they audio or anything else, start with the highest technology. After people around the world acknowledge that this is the highest technology, then you bring that technology to more affordable prices.
|
@amir_asr makes a lot of assumptions. Assuming what ones ideas on audio are. Amir I for one will never point a browser at your site nor click on a link you post. You can assume I am not interested in your findings on audio equipment I have zero interest in. You are correct you are not a scientist nor an engineer. Nor are you a professional reviewer, you are average joe with some software and that is it. No need to respond as someone here said you monkeys will respond I could care even less about there opinions.
|
If a DBT is done, you have to count each test, no matter the number of participants, as a single data point. Because the test results may be biased. So, the number of tests required to be statistically significant goes well past the majority of tests ever reported. Make the sample of tests large enough to be statistically significant and you are at the man on the street level of participants, not trained listeners. And that is how you get Bose level of audio quality. |
Now we are off topic but with the grace of the mods - that policy is common for used goods, of course. |
With a margin of likely well over 1000%, I don't think some returns or even a lot of returns is an issue. Even 50% would be totally acceptable.
Amazon's return rate I think is close to 20%.
|
What warped sense of morality do you have where someone defending themselves from falsehoods and lies is the bad guy? |
Not really interesting. Consumer law guarantees certain rights to both vendor and buyer which cannot be denied for a year, maybe two. The statement you quoted is a business decision by the vendor - time limit 30 days or so? Who pays for all the fuses that are returned within that time period, because they didn’t like them? Either you make a product that people wanna keep for the duration of their expected lives, or refund them if it is faulty. Not simply because ya tried and didn't like - that is such an expensive business decision whereby the consumer takes on the risks of other consumers before him who were didn't like the fuse. |
@noske , "Fanaticism is always a sign of repressed doubt. ~Carl Jung" |
@prof, I ceased to be amazed, many hundreds of posts ago. |
@tsushima1 +1 |
I don’t have the lengthy experience posting on ASR that you have, but I’ve certainly seen new members of subjectivist bent banned very quickly. And to put things in perspective, I’ve seen that many more times than I’ve seen an actual single- or double-blind test performed for or by ASR.
Amir uses a different dictionary from others "frequent" here means "every now and then".
Perhaps the site would be better named Audio Medicine Review? 😊
While ASR-ers don’t actually perform DBT or similar nearly as often as they demand it of others, it is useful to consider what it is and why we should do them sometimes. If we take the DAC example, imagine if I were to do comparative listening test for DACs including a Topping? Now I’ve read ASR for a good while and watched enough of the videos so when I think of Topping I think of Amir. So how can I listen to a Topping knowingly and enjoy it? To give it a fair audition, I’ll need to disguise the brand. |
@fair +1 A loud member, or a moderator, or a whole pack of them, publicly accuse an "inconvenient" member of disingenuity, of lack of knowledge, or of low intelligence, and then said member is immediately banned, with no way to defend himself there.
|
The topic about whether or not a vendor should offer refunds is up to them. They have to weigh if the additional sales they make because of the policy outweighs the number of refunds they get. It is a strategy known as "risk reversal". The vendor takes the risk instead of the customer. Let them run their company as they see fit and the customer shops as they see fit. See: https://ezinearticles.com/?Risk-Reversal---A-Strategy-I-Learnt-From-Jay-Abraham&id=1009021
|
noske
That’s interesting. "Satisfaction guaranteed or your money back" is a common guarantee in the US, although often with a time limit. |
@prof
The problem with ASR as of late is that such opportunity is not always given. A loud member, or a moderator, or a whole pack of them, publicly accuse an "inconvenient" member of disingenuity, of lack of knowledge, or of low intelligence, and then said member is immediately banned, with no way to defend himself there.
As far as I can tell, this is absolutely the expectation of certain ASR moderators, and also of certain ASR members whose opinions are considered as the only valid ones by some moderators. That's the crux of the issue the OP raised. As a medical analogy, this resembles an autoimmune disease. A healthy, balanced moderation serves a function similar to the one served by immune system. A hyperactive censorship, on the other hand, may be gradually killing ASR organism. |
That policy must be particular to America. In my country, there are conditions on the reasons you may wish for and be provided a refund - not liking it is not one of them. Such a liberal policy in America has unintended consequences on a number of levels. But that is what is known as micro-economics and out of bounds on this esteemed forum. |
It’s amazing isn’t it? By the very logic of the article kota1 wants us to accept, he’s not a trained listener. It would be at least as damning of his own method. PLUS he has added sighted bias in to the mix when he "breaks in" and listens to products.
(This happens all the time when audiophiles attempt to pick apart the usefulness of blind testing. They suddenly get all picky about variables in an attempt to dismiss the tests, conveniently forgetting that the variables would apply to their own method of testing gear!)
|
@kota1 ,
Did you even read the article you just linked on blind testing? You post reinforces what Amir has said on these pages. Trained listeners are superior to every day audiophiles in detecting anomalies. That you for reinforcing that message. The article provided no evidence to refute blind testing. |
Quick show of hands, everyone here who conducted their last blind listening test with a PANEL of TRAINED listeners, say aye. Congratulations if your every audio purchase gets judged by your panel. See the link I posted above: "If you want to take the variable of the listener out of the equation, then your listener panel needs training." When I buy new gear I get a 30-60 day return period. I drop it in the rack, let it break in (I know, the horror) for a few weeks and then take it out. If I don’t miss it, refund. If I can’t live without it "grinrictus" sets in and I buy it.
|
My personal preference is getting the opinions of people who bought gear, used gear, and then took a moment to post a review of the gear. I combine both professional reviews as well as user reviews. The cable cranks will blow a gasket about a cable that costs a premium even though they don’t own it, never tried it and never will. Yet you go on Amazon and see a hundred of five star reviews from people who loved it and are now fans of the brand. I’ll take a hundred 5 star reviews with positive feedback over one cable crank any day. Plus if I don’t like it. refund that bad boy. Whether you find value at $10 a foot or $100 a foot as long as it is worth it to you, NP.
|
Did you actually read that article? It doesn’t make the point you seem to think it makes. It re-enforces the liabilities of sighted listening. In other words, even taking the article's argument as given: sighted listening has ALL the liabilities cited in the article PLUS the addition of sighted bias.
|
Yeesh. I hadn't seen that post about the Benchmark. That's particularly telling.... It must feel nice to feel better informed than truly technically proficient designers, because you have Golden Ears. Someday I'll reach that super power.... |
Again with with lies @fleschler . I have now written, I think 3 times, that I do not participate on ASR, and have not in some time. If you have to resort to lying to make your point, I can only assume your position is weak, and you have internal conflict. Please see my Jung quote much earlier. |
@fleschler , would it be safe to say you are not an electrical designer or electrical engineer? If so, under what authority do you make the following comment?
|
Why wouldn't Amir defend himself? If someone was defaming you on another public forum, wouldn't you think it reasonable to defend yourself? It makes sense to defend yourself directly to the criticisms in said forum, given people are mostly disinclined to come over to ASR to take a nuanced view of what goes on there. As we've repeatedly seen the forum strawmanned in this thread. Do you expect to just be able to publicly criticize anyone you want, and with any level of misrepresentation, without any consequence or pushback?
|
As to the Benchmark L4 versus the CJ pre-amp, one of the comments was The LA4 certainly isn't "lacking" anything. It's just transparent. But I could say it does 'lack' certain things in the sense of comparison to the CJ tube preamp. Based on my experience with both brands, I found CJ to have a house sound, not one that I or my friends prefer. The Benchmark, on the other hand, stock is clean and clear but lacking in areas the CJ excels-body and warmth of expression. There is a cure for the Benchmark. Replace the computer quality, cheap-ass regulators, power and filter caps, maybe parts of the audio board, the Op-amp, etc. with audio (much more costly) parts. Benchmark products are only okay stock but can be great when modified. Their HDR-1 DAC is a great example of a terrific design with mediocre execution. It is a giant killer when modified. |
| Post removed |
ASR has possibly hundreds of active members and dozens of threads, without checking. Such power of control that you attribute to Amir! The bloke must never sleep. I’d bannish myself on a whim were I to insist on pushing the general guidelines to such a point that I became the antipathy of what the spirit of the forum is intended to convey. I made an innocent mistake on an unrelated forum a while ago and was banished for making light of a certain person in high office. I was unaware of certain strict protocols. I own my mistake, however innocent it may have been. |
Thomas Edison did blind testing using whole audiences in the 1900’s to show off his new phonograph. He had an opera singer and his phonograph behind a thin curtain on stage. The audience was asked to guess if the singing was live or a recording. The audience couldn’t tell the difference. |
@cleeds , I have seen 3 people most loudly clamor for blind testing in this discussion. Amir, who stated he has done many many blind tests. Prof, who has done at least several blind tests, which he described in this thread, and me, who has also done blind tests, which I noted. How do you think I reached this spot? I used to believe I could hear differences until it was shown to me I could not. I also did medical research and lived blind testing.
|
| Post removed |
Amir will measure the actual signal output when testing things like cables, and show that they either do not change the signal at all, or that the changes are so extraordinarily low they are well in to the realm we need instruments like a Precision Analyzer to detect them. Remember: instruments are typically devised to extend our limited senses, to reliably detect what we can not detect using our senses alone. And yet audiophiles will still claim to hear sonic differences with such products, and simply dismiss this evidence. This is akin to dismissing the scientific evidence for the limits of human hearing and claiming "I don’t care what the objective data say, I can hear up to 30 kHz!" While also refusing to take an audiogram with a professional audiologist because "I reject the use of such blind tests to tell me the limits of my hearing." And you want to talk about "outlandish claims?" In many such cases...even though Amir actually will include listening tests...he doesn’t need to. Based on plenty of research in to the limits of human hearing, distortion levels, masking thresholds etc, he can say "This is inaudible" from the measurements. To say it IS audible is going against most of the science and engineering theory. So Amir is not making the outlandish or extraordinary claim, the audiophile who claims to hear differences is doing so. So IF you are going to reject the measurements and the inferences from those measurements, these audiophiles could step up and show, in tests where they aren’t peeking at the gear, they can actually reliably identify the differences they claim. Unsurprisingly, this virtually never happens. But...they’ll just continue to throw darts at Amir and ASR, and continue to brag about having "more capable hearing" than poor Amir and the ASR crowd, without ever putting this to a test. How convenient.
|
