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


After my Audio Science Review review forum, it became apparent that nearly the only way one can determine the measurements of an audio product is wait for a review on line or in a publication.  Most equipment is never reviewed or is given a subjective analysis rather than a measurement oriented review.  One would think that manufacturers used tests and measurements to design and construct their products. 

Manufacturers routinely give the performance characteristics of their products as Specifications.  Those are not test measurements.

I searched the Revel speaker site for measurements of any of their speakers and could not find any.  Revels are universally lauded for their exceptional reviewed measurements.  Lack of published manufacturer measurements is true for nearly every speaker manufacturer I've searched for on line, perhaps several hundred.   Same is true for amps, pre-amps, DACs, transports, turntables, well you get the picture.  Do they have something to hide?   I doubt the good quality products have anything to hide but poor quality products do.  

ASR prides itself in providing "true" measurements that will aid in purchase decisions.   Why don't the manufacturers provide these measurements so that reviewers can test if they are truthful or not?

Then there are the cables and tweaks for which I suspect that there are inadequate tests available to measure sonically perceived differences but which objectivists believe don't exist or are "snake oil."  

Well, please chime in if you have some illuminating thoughts on the subject.   

I would have loved to see manufacturers measurements on my equipment and especially those that I rejected.  

fleschler

@westcoastaudiophile +10 Even his own member Mr. Hooper/Prof chooses and inferior distortion unit A over superb measuring unit B component (CJ versus Benchmark L4) for it’s possibly easier to listen or enjoy in his system. Personally, I think that is quite an extreme example of difference in sound, like the difference between the COS Engineering DV1v and DV2v DACs. Different presentation of music. (The latter two probably measure nearly the same though, they are so similar in construction, just D1v has twice the parts power section and chip count).

I could tell a CJ pre-amp or amp from super clean measuring solid state units, but not .0001% versus .0005% distortion.  Not even .1% from .0005% or probably 1% at 1Khz from .0005% at 100 db.

As for the topic of "blind testing" it just isn’t necessary or practical. Look, I drop a component in the rack and let it break in for a few weeks. I take it out before the 30 day return period expires. If I can’t tell a difference send it back. If my face freezes in "grinrictus" I leave it in. The people who argue about blind testing are just using it as a crutch to win an argument.

Well even in medicine the use oof blind/double-blind testing is standard.
So the witch doctor can cure quite a bit.

these stories have almost practical way to repeat themselves. How would Flescher’s neighbour know whether one needs a power cable or IC or fuse? It becomes a mishmash or trail and error to arrive at some nirvana, and it is not even clear that the sound is ni fact changed or not. It reads more like a story.

If those cables seem to make a difference, then do we believe that they will measure electrically different or not?

holmz

As for checking out virtual systems there is a text box beneath each one with a link "read more" which expands it. The links I mentioned are embedded in the description of my system.

The FR is impressive.

Were there any time domain measurement like impulse or step function response? 

I have been running through my preamp options here ranging from purely passive, to a high quality op-amp active stage, to a tube active stage with NOS Amperex (Holland), to a well-regarded unity gain solid state model. The preamp has been sort of a sticking point for me over the years and I have owned around 20 highly regarded (by reviewers) preamps, both tubed and solid state, and at varying price points up to and in a couple of cases exceeding $10K.

The recent comments here about the Benchmark LA4, caused me to reconsider that unit that I was previously interested in but for whatever reason never pursued. Based on all the "professional" reviews, as well as user/owner comments here and at Audio Asylum, it seems the LA4 measures superbly, and drives whatever signal is provided accurately, clearly, and without embellishment. Theoretically, that should work great for me since my front end (streamer/server and DAC) is known for being full-bodied and tonally dense, and my amplification is known for being musical - IOW, I do not need a preamp to add anything to the mix but only to provide a display, a remote, and to stay out of the way sonically.

The only negative I read from a minority of the reviewers is that in some systems they did not perceive the same level of body that they heard with other preamps, and particularly tubed preamps. A couple of people thought the Benchmark made their systems sound a little thin. Of course, Benchmark indicates this is likely because of improved timing and the absence of distortion (and the measurements support that assessment).

In summary, the excellent measurements (and reviews) resulted in my purchasing the unit but how it sounds with my gear, and compared to my existing preamp options, will be the deciding factor on whether I keep it. If it causes my system to sound thin, then I will not be keeping it since I have several other preamp options that sound really good.

@fleschler 

@westcoastaudiophile I don’t know of any high end/expensive/boutique cable manufacturers who provide testing measurements of their cables.

Iconoclast does. They have extensive specifications/measurements. Alas, none of that resulted in better/different sound: