Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

A short dialogue from ASR... ( a cartoonish dialogue, a fiction not too much far from reality )

 

 

« ASR zealot : I dont know about the cymbal decay time and the brush rustle sound time envelope , i must use my tools to analyse the recording ...

---why dont you use your ears?

ASR zealot : i have nobody to supervise the blind test in a correct way... As you know the ears are dubious...

----How do you know if your analysis will reveal less about your audio system and more about the recording itself and what about if your system is not in a good room or if your system is not really so good ?

Are your tools able to gave you everything about all factors of transparency : the recording trade off ? the audio system parts ? the audio system synergy ? the audio system with no acoustic optimization ? or the same audio system in a well controlled acoustic room ?

you never use your ears first to differentiate all these factors?

ASR zealot : No need, a well behaved component measured for his linear behaviour is all there is to know... Hearing delude us in a way an oscilloscope cannot. i always listen to confirm my oscilloscope lecture.. My acuity is so good that i am always synchonized with it...

----I understand, but if the cymbal decay is not good , perhaps it is a bad file, or a bad recording technic which was used, or perhaps a bad component, or perhaps a bad synergy between them , or perhaps a bad room ? And perhaps your ears defect ?

ASR zealot : no problem i dont use my ears much because of their biases anyway...But i pass very hard to pass acuity test with success..

----And you will write a review with this recording anyway only if you are able to measure the amplifier or the speakers and use blind test with a few reviewers, is this so ?

ASR zealot : yes...

--- But suppose the recording engineer was not so good especially for the cymbal part even if the measured speakers or the measured amplifiers are measured as good with a linear behaviour what about the recording engineer fault for the cause of the lack in transparency...

ASR zealot : you dont understand the method... All audible qualities are illusory or subjective anyway, even transparency... What matter is the OBJECTIVE blind test results for our readers and the measured specs of the amplifier ...

--- Then you will go on with the amplifier review ?

ASR zealot : yes... transparency of the amplifier will be measured... not the recording technique..And the amplifier will be objectively measured and confirmed by blind test

---- Then the choice of the recording and of the room did not matter at the end ?

Asr zealot : what matter is objective measuring science... Room acoustic is a market superstition... Well measured speakers dont need a room, they will do well in any room ..

---- If even transparency is subjective as the end result , the only real objective factor is measuring tool ?

ASR zealot : yes...our role is to explain to each consumers they cannot trust any non verified by us gear component, they cannot trust their ears either...The measures is the objective level of transparency...

--- you are then the only hope to tame the audio jungle market ?

ASR zealot: this is why we exist... Law and order...

--- But psycho-acoustic experiment just demonstrated that the Fourier linear time independant mapping based models of hearing is wrong , the way our ears/brain work had no direct relation with our tools ?

ASR zealot : it is the reverse ,the experiment demonstrated that our ears cannot be trusted, i precisely stated to you that our ears cannot be trusted , even mine with top tested acuity, and this experiment by Oppenheim and Magnasco confirm it completely... The tool behave well linearly in a predictive way, the ears dont work in this way..

Only our set of linear tools verify each market component and can say something objective about sound quality... the ears works as a pair of uncontrolled horses ... our tools are the necessary blinders to tame and trained them in the right direction ... Our ears work bad non linearly as a bad impredictable circuit and dont obey science, mathematic is time independant unlike our poor hearing.. Psycho-acoustic study hearing only to replace it by A. I. which will be an improvement ...You dont seems to understand science ? You are a philosopher no ?

 

 

 

Yeah I’m in the camp now of leaving it up. Amir wants this to be deleted. He spammed this thread and now is praising the moderators. Hey @amir_asr you still haven’t answered why you used to not level match!

So much frothing and veins popping out on foreheads!  Mahgister, you win the prize my friend!  Your outpourings are truly epic and everything I have come to expect from the golden-ear brigade.  And you call an ASR member a zealot?  Take a look in the mirror!  The only reason to remove this thread would be because it's hacking over so much diatribe that's gone on between the objective and subjective side of audio reproduction on HiFi systems ad nauseum for decades.  The fact is that you are either using your equipment to listen to music or using music to listen to your equipment.  Personally I'm from the former camp.  I enjoy music and have listened to it on a range of gear from very expensive to downright poverty spec and do you know what?  Every time I listen to something I like, it's still the thing I like.  It's not a live performance and no conventionally produced recording can match that.  The reason it can't match it is the amount of processes the recording passes through on its way to being a finished product.  Subsequently, its a moot point as to what combination of expensive audio gear can come the closest to reproducing a live performance, none of it can.  I recently started a discussion about speakers on ASR and my assertion was that the search for the "perfect" speaker was a pointless exercise.  To back this up, I illustrated the broad range of speaker designs and design philosophy, not to mention materials and electronics.  There is such variety in this technology that to declare one the "best" in not practical or honest.  As many have pointed out here, it comes down to your personal experience and what you think is best, nobody else's .  Personally, I'm really happy with the Q Audio speakers I just picked up for $275 and the little Class D Bluetooth amp I hooked up to them mainly because I just want a nice, room filling sound, not loud not impressive, just nice to listen to music with. I did some research, mainly on the speakers and for the money, they looked ideal for my purposes.  The amp, well I just followed the latest chip tech and tried not to buy an amp with something obsolete inside it.  I used a cut up shaver cord for speaker cables and paired the rig to my phone to listen to my Spotify playlists.  That's it, nice, simple, cheap, sounds good, no distortion (that I can perceive) and now I have the music I like in my living room. Happy.

In other words: there is nothing in principle wrong with reporting hearing a sonic difference that one has not measured

@prof

Yes of course his acolytes will head in sand defend the emperor, ignoring all facts like he both knows what he’s testing, has the knowledge and means to measure/analyze the difference in signals with the equipment he is pictured with, has confessed to having cheated by cranking low level/silence, etc, etc, etc.

Never mind the long history of fabricating tests aka the AVS link.

All that it to be ignored, in the name of science, you know.

Wanna bet he can’t repeat the feat proctored and unable to cheat, like at PAF 24?

Or more likely avoids any proctored test at all.

@amir_asr 

He says I am unable to tell such files apart and by implication, he can.  Can he AJ?  

I'm saying you can't tell them apart without the cheating you've both admitted to and denied simultaneously. The latter, about the now measurements guru/former Microsoft exec Amir being unable to measure the difference between bit depth/noise floor/etc.of computer files, even manipulated, is comical.

Not quite this level https://www.avsforum.com/threads/establishing-differences-by-the-10-volume-method.1136745/page-21#post-16385934

I don't care what Kevn believes, you are the one posting the gamed Foobar ABX files as retroactive bragging rights after the AVS debacle above.

This is exactly the type of test I'm proposing for PAF 24, that you take and demonstrate ability to detect difference between 16/44 and Hi rez...but without any of your analyzer gear around and being proctored/overseen for the first time, i.e. not allowed to crank silence etc methods of cheating.

I already know you are going to use the Salons are too heavy excuse, so which Revels are suffice vs a garage speaker? I have Revels too.