Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
There is a significant body of measurements and reviews from blind listening panels conducted over many years by Hi Fi Choice magazine which are purposefully ignored by ASR because it provides evidence which strongly contradicts many of their ludicrous beliefs.Like ,for example,sources,preamps and power amps not influencing stereo imaging because that is apparently purely a function of the speakers and room acoustics. So no surprises then when some of the components that measure "well" [like the Topping D90 DAC and the Purifi Class D amps] ,when inserted in a system with good imaging,have the remarkable ability to almost totally destroy that quality and ruin the system.Well for those that can hear stereo imaging anyway.And it is surprising how many people seem to be incapable of it.I suspect that many of those involved in ASR fall into that category.As well as being bad dancers because they also seem to ignore things like rhythm and timing. Bad dancers with poor depth perception.And fascist tendencies. |
@markwd "but I do encourage you to continue to research, learn," It is this incredible arrogance and condescending superciliousness from Amir and his minions that most of us find unacceptable. I could just as easily say go away, listen and hopefully one day learn. The reason no one reacted and discussed Mahgister's articles is not because no one understands them but rather because he repeats them ad nauseam and bores the pants off everyone. |
@nonoise You are on to something there, even half in the bag! 🤪 Medical placebo effects do work surprisingly well with specific brain-mediated factors, like pain management, insomnia, stress-effects, etc. And auditory perception is definitely in that camp. But, but, there is a great opportunity to design experiments that do some kind of preference testing/difference testing over longer exposure windows. I'm not aware of anything like that though it may exist...anyone? Sounds like a very expensive experiment for a new PhD at JBL... |
When someone conflates medical expectation bias with auditory expectation bias, you know they're really reaching. Even half in the bag as I am right now, I know that anyone succumbing to the "placebo effect" via a controlled medical study will/can claim an improvement in their condition but it's just a matter of time before they realize it's bumpkis. Their deteriorating health will prove that out. If you're going to proffer that BS, then one must accept and allow the same curtesy to those who listen for changes over a long period of time or it will just amount to another parlor trick. Those subjects in the Harmon tests were found to need half an hour to adjust between tests as their first exposure to a new room thoroughly threw them for a loop. Subsequent tests kept that as the time frame. After repeated exposure, they got to where they could find some consensus as to what sounded pleasing. The proof is in the long term listening. We always readjust when things settle down and that is always discounted as it throws out the "findings." Nothing like rigging a test based on rules set by those whose intent is to guarantee their results. All the best,
|
Quote-"While put in harsh tone, your underlying impression is correct in that ASR is far more than me, or measurements that I do. We have become the gathering place for many experts in these fields to have most substantive discussions of audio anywhere. The level of knowledge dwarfs what goes on elsewhere. Witness how I was able to address @mahgister papers and have a discussion with him while none of you could even follow those topics." Sure.But what that encourages in some people is buying products based purely on measurements rather than on how they sound.A friend brought his Topping D90 DAC over which he had bought on the basis of it being the "best measuring DAC ever".We compared it to some old 90s DACs and a $500 Sony CD player from 1995 and it sounded terrible by comparison.So the problem is you are measuring the wrong things.Or at least from a sonics point of view irrelevant things. |
@kevn I think you are mistaken about several things in your post. And I am very aware of how electromagnetism works and the recent YouTube discussions of some of the more confounding aspects of electromagnetism. Like quantum mechanics, sometimes intuitions drawn from everyday experience seem a bit odd, but the equations typically serve as a bedrock for analysis, and we know that audio at low power and relatively low frequencies is fairly consistent in following relatively simple electrical law-like patterns. First, Amir’s measurements of speakers are done by a microphone listening to the reproduced tone sweeps, so whatever special claims you make about magnetic flux are largely irrelevant to those measurements. Second, measuring the signal at the front end of a cable and the back end and comparing them should show your suggested e-mag influences somehow...and they typically don’t (note careful addition of "typically"). Third, most folks don’t really know what "science" means in the modern world. There is a long trail of Philosophy of Science from Logical Positivism through to Popperian Falsification, then social models of science a la Kuhn and Feyerband, and then the actual praxis of science that is built up around institutions. Applying ideas derived from science to assess audio products is different from, say, figuring out how alleles affect phenotypic traits in molecular biology, but it’s also more similar to survey work in some of the social sciences. At best we can think of it as deriving from a commitment to deep scrutiny of empirical methods. There’s nothing indoctrinating or brainwashing about that! It’s just a reification of being careful about everything and using tools with equal care. |
@markwd ”It’s very incongruous and does not correspond with ordinary science and engineering principles, or with even everyday logic per se.” There is nothing ordinary about science or about the electro-magnetic world. When one only depends on electrical measurements for their full conclusions, what is missed is the other half of electromagnetism - the magnetic world. Electricity does not travel through the cable - it travels through the magnetic field surrounding that cable. ‘Ordinary’ science has not yet understood how to accurately measure the nuance and time flux of magnetic fields in the way they affect sound from signal transfer. This is why conclusions made purely from electrical measurements are a half-science. There is so much we do not know yet. True science is about questions, not mere answers. @markwd ’Do note that manufacturers’ specs can be false and also that a specific unit may be broken. Testing by a third party like ASR can help to ascertain the reasons for the differences, not always perfectly, but they would add additional support to these apparently tendentious ideas about these products.’ There Isn’t anyone here that doesn’t agree with that. The concern is that Amir, with his unbending stance that listening cannot complement measurements for the now, until we know more about the measurement of magnetic flux, hugely influences audiophiles to believe the same. That isn’t science, as proudly stated in the name of his site, it’s indoctrination, or brainwashing.
In friendship - kevin |
While put in harsh tone, your underlying impression is correct in that ASR is far more than me, or measurements that I do. We have become the gathering place for many experts in these fields to have most substantive discussions of audio anywhere. The level of knowledge dwarfs what goes on elsewhere. Witness how I was able to address @mahgister papers and have a discussion with him while none of you could even follow those topics. We have large number of industry participants, designers, reviewers, and serious hobbyist who read and participate in ASR on daily basis. Go and ask any question from any area of audio and you get deepest discussion of it anywhere. Research will be cited, engineering design analyzed, methods of evaluation proposed, etc. All in a professional setting devoid of much mudslinging and rude behavior. This has caused a movement in the industry by shifting analysis of audio outside of fluff reviews and marketing materials into "prove it to me." Companies are responding by building better products. Mind you, there is still a lot has to happen but the movement has started and it is not going to stop because folks put their fingers in their ears and refuse to learn. |
Why are you daring us? Why don't you go and do that AB test -- only do it with your ears alone. Shoot a video of it and then we have something to talk about.
You are dead wrong. Before starting ASR, I co-founded whatsbestforum where I routinely defended subjectivists by accepting listening test challenges from objectivists and passing them. Meanwhile, not one subjectivist around me would attempt to take the test let alone pass it. Those tests were passable because objective evidence showed that there were differences. You are getting into areas where we are confident from multiple angles that such audible differences don't exist. If you want to claim otherwise, per your own suggestion, go and do that testing, document it and let us see them. Note that we believe that you are perceiving those differences. We know because when similarly situated in sighted evaluations, we too conclude there are differences that measurements don't show. Difference between us is that we know the faults in this kind of testing. And so routinely follow with blind tests that show us these problems.
|
Well, the issue is....some of you guys are such "intense purists" in constant pursuit of "intense purity".... "avoid dsp like the plague" type of guys. And yet, all these spatial qualities, surround virtualization type of effects are being delivered to you on your "purist dac" to some degree, as you go up in price...and it just dazzled ya! Yes, yes, just keep hallucinating that it is all because of the purity (the "power supply" kept getting better and better as you went up in price!!, whoop di doo). No worries, you’ll receive your pure dac and continue to retain your sanity. Enjoy the spatial effects, huuugge deeep soundstage with all kinds of layering n and all. Just don’t worry about "how" it happened (All the purists could lose their "purity" sleep if they found out how). We don't want a "FPGA gate" like the "MOFI gate" (i.e., the purest of pure analog pursuit and betrayal), do we now.....
|
No one needs to prove something sounds better or different. Only the person who is testing it in their own system knows whether or not it sounds better or different. Obviously, all cable manufacturers say theirs is the best. But they all sound different......so it is up to you to know which is the most transparent or desireable to you. I do not need to prove what I hear. The earth flatters need to prove that I don’t hear what I hear.......and they cannot because what you hear is truth. Certainly you can quote someone who was fooled. However, that does not make a case that everyone is fooled every time they hear a difference. Please get out and listen and you will know the truth......this is not Tom Foolery......this is about trusting your own experience. This is not about theory and measurements......this is about WHAT YOU HEAR.......What the heck to you hear? Tell us what you hear........or do you just want to defend your "position". It sounds better when all cables are off the floor. Can you HEAR that? It is not about a belief. It is a direct experience. Now, if you are so addicted to your "pre judged opinion" that you cannot listen objectively......then your results will be biased. Can you listen with an open mind and an open heart.....and just hear what you hear? This is the basic fundamental question this thread asks. Can you trust your experience?.......Can you listen without prejudice? Are there really many, many levels of transparency or is it all defined by a meter? To find out....you must listen with an open mind. |
Surely you can understand that the onus to prove a given set of cables improves the SQ rests on the person making that claim. Those that don't believe that cables make a difference have done blind ABX tests to come to that determination. Just in this thread alone there's a link to the test and results from a person who believed that he could 100% tell the difference between his Opus cables and Monster. After a blind test he's rethinking that confidence. But most cable believers, like you just stated, are unwilling to test their hearing by listening blind. |
The trouble is......that there is no proof that what is stated by the flat earthers is true. There are NO super double blind tests that prove all wires sound the same and that all DACs sound the same and that all amps sound the same (given a certain SINAD or not). Until you prove your point with tests then it remains for us to listen and know for ourself what is real. The "measurement alone method" (without listening tests) is completely scientifically unproven. Just made up words. When you listen.....you know.....now get out there and listen and tell us what you hear. Mommy says, do it now! |
| Post removed |
@ricevs Cool, man! I'm just glad that all the engineers and scientists I know and have known use rigor, measurement, and scrutinize one another using mechanisms like peer review before reaching conclusions and are humble enough to admit when in error. The known facts about cognitive and perceptual bias tell us to be a bit more careful about being "our own source of truth." Nothing sad about it! We are beautifully flawed. |
Not sure what you are getting at? Yes, we have theories explaining the existence of noise and distortion in audio reproduction. Those theories are used to develop engineered products that, in turn, reduce noise and distortion. That's how this science and engineering game works. Note that a "theory" in science is not just a speculation: The critical language cloud includes ideas like "testable," "make predictions,"withstand rigorous scrutiny," etc. |
When you do not trust what you hear......trust yourself......this is very sad. When you think you need to blind test yourself to believe what you just heard......again very sad. When you taste a certain variety of apple do you need to test yourself blindly to know that its a Granny Smith? I feel sorry for you "must do tests and and measurements to make certain that I am experiencing what I am experiencing" guys. Do you go to the love measuring machine when you fall in love? What a joke. You either trust what you hear/experience or you don't. Not much trust in those measurement guys. Back in the 70s we borrowed 10 Supex cartridges from Dave Fletcher at Sumiko (high end audio was a big club back then....everyone knew everyone). Now this is even before we knew that cables sounded different. We mounted them all on universal headshells and marked each one with a number on a small piece of masking tape. The three of us spent all day doing this test. We ALL agreed with every test. A few of them were not very good.....another batch was pretty good but there were 3 of them that stood out.....we spent a long time but finally figured out which one was the winner......we bought that one. After doing something like that you know you can trust your ears. Of course, this was all sighted. But it was very, very clear. The frequency graphs that came with each cartridge showed nothing of the differences we heard. Learn to trust youself.....trust that you can hear differences and they do not need to be proven or backed up by others. You are your own source of truth......live it....feel it....listen to it...trust it. It is REAL. |
@nonoise I do try to be careful in my use of conditional language...epistemic humility again about ideas and people, regardless of your characterization. I'd love to be shown an anomalous result where there is in fact more than "meets the eye, and scope," but just haven't seen any evidence for such things yet. The Technics anecdote is curious but needs facts, data, measurements--proof of any kind. The anomalous results, when they arrive, are the great point of cognitive reorganization. There's a great beauty in that sense of impermanence and the arrival at a new plateau of understanding. Sorry to wax poetic, but there is a sensual numinous feeling to good science for me. Bring me the novelty, but make sure it is fully baked! |
Well, the arguments presented above don't resemble a fantasy and flat-Earthers are the ones holding fast to irrational beliefs when presented with evidence to the contrary, so I'm both amused and confused by your presentation. You are also directly contradicted by Amir's discussion of cable testing, above, but I do encourage you to continue to research, learn, and perhaps someday ABX prove some of your ideas! I personally have no particular ego investment in audio equipment but do like trying to understand online communities and how beliefs (and fantasies) develop. |
Sorry, but that's a big conditional "can" along with "a specific" and to imply that Amir is gonna come to the rescue smacks of a little bit of hero worship. Earlier on, one member spoke of the different filter settings on a Technics unit that all measured the same but sounded different.
I found a similar review of my Technics SL-G700 Network/SACD Player where the reviewer spoke to Technics about the 4 (or so) digital filter settings and they told him that although they all measured the same, they sounded distinctly different and it was up to the listener to pick the one they preferred. Others have measured it and found out it to be the case as well. It should be easy enough to procure a unit, test it, and lay that dog to rest. All I could hear was a slight difference and went with the setting that didn't alter the incoming signal at all based on what reviewers were told by Technics, and yes, I could be fooled into not picking out the one I'm presently using that measures the same as the others as they're slight. That would more in the realm of a parlor trick. There's more than meets the eye, and scope. All the best, |
@markwd "We have theories like linear and non-linear distortions..." Exactly, you have just theories (general propositions)! |
Imagine if audiophiles all went with measurements only. They would all have pretty much the same gear and sound.
“Why did Joe spend all that extra money for the same results”? But I guess all would have rightful bragging rights. Not a bad deal, but its a fantasy. Science cannot account for how people think. So rest easy audiophiles. The ranks may be dwindling big-time but there is still hope!
|
You can say whatever fantasy you believe.....However, I dare any of you earth flatters to go over to someones house that has a serious stereo and has a bunch of buddies over and they A/B various gear......even of the same price and measured capabilities........They will all hear the differences in cables, DACs and whatever....while you are there. Will you admit to hearing any differences? You see, you will NEVER EVER let yourself be in this kind of situation. If you did not hear any differences they would spread the word all over the net that you are deaf. If you heard the differences then you would have to admit to the whole world that you were WRONG all those years. So.....your ego defense mechanism will NEVER allow you to be a room where this is happening. What cowards you all are.....he he. Sweet but cowardly. As I have said before.....only the deaf and the double deaf need blind and double blind tests to know what is real. We can hear amazing differences within seconds....and yes, it is repeatable. Did you guys listen to the link I posted? Did you hear the differences? Will you admit it? This thread (and type of thread) will go on forever and ever....because the earth flatters will never give in. May we all enjoy our low distorton systems.....whether it is by measurements or by listening. I wish you all the goosebumps in the universe. |
You listen and look. You haven't presented any results where only your ears were involved. So you don't know. You also don't know that other factors impact fidelity such as levels not being the same. And the fact that there is such a thing as "lucky guess." All such tests need to be repeated until we are sure they are not by chance. Again, when we subject you all to controlled testing, you fail to hear these things. As I showed with MikeL situation. He was sure. He talked about how his MIT cable expanded soundstage by some 50%. Yet that large difference disappeared in testing where only his ear was involved. |
Nothing in life is measured 100%. Yet we successfully live. If you are sick, your doctor runs some tests and then using his knowledge and experience, guess correctly most of the time what is wrong with you. Do you challenge your doctor that he has not testing every part of your body in every which way? You don't. Same with audio. We measure and then combine that with our knowledge of audio, engineering, science, etc. and arrive at a high confidence conclusion. You don't like the conclusion? Come back with a controlled test that proves you are hearing something that we say our analysis is wrong. Since you don't have that, our conclusion stands. Remember, we can't measure what doesn't exist. You can't ask us to count the number of aliens landing in your backyard and when we say we can't, say, "look, your measurements are no good." Prove to us first that with your ears alone, and with all other conditions equalized, your listening tests are valid. Without it, you just want to be right, not be right. |
MikeL’s speaker wire testing was done at his own home on his system costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
More reason to believe that people’s senses are not remotely as good as they think they are. But read this other study. "A similar study from 1983 (not currently on JSTOR, but you can read the abstract here) found that participants couldn’t tell when they were given Coca-Cola in a Pepsi bottle or vice versa. Interestingly, though, when surreptitiously given two cups of the same drink—one cup marked with the letter “L”, the other with the letter “S”—participants overwhelmingly preferred the latter. Why? In a different part of the study, participants indicated that they simply preferred the letter “S” (6.8/10 on a likeability scale) to the letter “L” (6/10), presumably because the former is more frequent, and people tend to like what they know. Whatever the explanation, this preference for “S” cola over an identical “L” cola is a particularly powerful demonstration—as if one were needed—that, in the cola wars, branding is everything." So easy to fool human senses. Identical testing to above has been done in audio with same results. And many of us can report the same happening to us. That is, we think we have made a change to the system, perceive a difference, but then find out that the change was not made! Until such time that you allow yourself to be tested at least once in this way, you will live in fog of mistaken conclusions. |
@ricevs Actually, you are inverting the way science and logic works. We have theories like linear and non-linear distortions, as well as noise, are introduced into the transfer function of a system due to a range of thermodynamic and quantum interactions in stuff like semiconductors. The effects of these distortions and noise manifest as producing spectral spray, overtones, harmonics, etc. in the output signal. This spectrum can be measured with some accuracy using methods like Amir applies. There is no evidence for the presence of other types of unmeasurable phenomena. We can never prove that there are no other distortions, noise, etc. We just have no evidence for them. It is the positive task for a researcher who creates a theory that there are other measurable phenomena to prove that they exist. I listen, but I doubt you know. |
markwd You are assuming that our current measurements can detect all distortions, noise and differences in sound. That is an assumption that has NEVER EVER been proven. So, your basis is basically a fantasy......a made up bunch of words. You might as well say the moon is made up of green cheese. There is no.....I mean no proof that measurements = all sonic differences.....NONE. You just want to believe in the tooth fairy. This is not science to hold a made up belief and assume everything follows your belief. You want to prove your "theory"? Then you need audio listening tests (serious ones).....plain and simple. I listen......therefore I KNOW. Do you listen or are you just making up stuff? |
@ricevs Well, it’s an interesting series of claims that I’ve read before but it’s not clear why that might be the case. How can we hear differences that aren’t somehow present in the audio signal and therefore measurable? It’s very incongruous and does not correspond with ordinary science and engineering principles, or with even everyday logic per se. Do note that manufacturers’ specs can be false and also that a specific unit may be broken. Testing by a third party like ASR can help to ascertain the reasons for the differences, not always perfectly, but they would add additional support to these apparently tendentious ideas about these products. |
No, you can get a dozen DACs with very similar measurements and they will still ALL sound different from each other. Check out reviews from all over the world that prove this. The two DACs a/bed both have very good specs. They do not measure poorly. Please listen to wires and solder and resistors and jacks, etc and get back to us about it all being measurements. You do listening.....you will KNOW. You theorize...you get words....not knowledge As many of you know.....I have modded CD players, DVD player, SACD players and DACs for years. Aso designed and sold my own DACs. I can take any machine and make is sound way, way better and it still measures the same. Go figure. I don't have unhappy customers.....they like the results after modding to before modding.....they say it sounds more detailed and more real.....yet is still measures the same. Have you every modded something? Do you know what parts and execution can bring? Only those that do and listen will know. All other noise is just made up fantasy ego trippin. YOU HAVE TO LISTEN TO KNOW HOW SOMETHING SOUNDS. Times infinity......this is the TRUTH. |
@deep_333 Sure, DSP can change the way things sound, but I'm not aware of any manufacturers who don't make such features switchable and therefore hide away their secret sauce. Pretty much all DAC makers strive towards accurate reproduction first and DSP features are add-ons (even if their algorithms are proprietary for this add-ons). Seems like an odd and unlikely claim but I'd be interested to learn about specific instances! |
TWo DACS that measure well are more likely to sound similar. If they measure differently, better chance they sound different. If they sound different, then which one is best? Answer: whichever one you think. But in that case, there is no data to support that either one is objectively the "best" or even "better". One thing is better to audiophile A and something else is for Audiophile b). What the hey?
Subjectively, anything is possible. Everyone is different, but well designed high performance electronics will tend to be more similar than not, which can be pretty boring when you think about all the gyrations audiophiles go through to achieve the best sound yet few can even agree on what "best sound" even means. Not a problem when things are measured properly. Like it or lump it. |
There is no "one thing" that makes the sound. It is everything. Certainly measurements can be counted as one of the infinite things that MAKE the sound. However, every single part inside a component (and the wires connecting it, and the line conditioning and power cords and the feet used underneath and shelving, etc) all MAKE the sound. Every single part inside a DAC or whatever contributes to the sound. I have been doing listening tests since the 70s and this has ALL WAYS been the case. Measurements alone are laughable. Audio is not simple. It is infinite in how things change the sound and most of the things that change sound CANNOT be measured......plain and simple. All you have to do is listen.....to know what I just said is correct. Have you every A/Bed resistors and hook up wires and solder brands and capacitors and types of damping material and jacks, etc.??????No, you have not. I have. So, you have no information as to whether I am correct or not. However, there are thousands of posts all over the internet backing up what I just claimed. The claims that all parts, wires, DACs, preamps and amps sound the same is made by people who NEVER, EVER listen. For if they listened their poor ego would explode. Bottom line to all this thread.....if you listen....you KNOW....if you do not listen.....you DO NOT KNOW. How can you KNOW what something sounds like without listening......even a 5 year old can understand this logic. It is nonsense to think otherwise. |
@ricevs Of course it may be possible to hear differences between DACs. If one is poorly engineered and introduces significant noise and distortion while the other is state-of-the-art (SOTA) in terms of SINAD, then SQ may be distinct. Such differences will also be apparent when the two DACs are measured. You may be confusing this with the argument that two SOTA DACs without other specific flaws are not likely to have audible differences. |
If you properly deal with the things where the data matters first the wires will all work themselves out relatively easily. If you don’t then you are guessing but it still may all work out eventually. Well informed choices are always best. At one end, you can pay for good quality affordable wires on Amazon that will get the job done perfectly fine (Mogami for a slight premium is always a solid choice) or take it as far as your imagination and budget might lead you. But if you tell me the wires are responsible for your good sound, my response will be "whatever you say...have fun!". Disclaimer: I know for a fact that all wires do not sound the same. I also know that wires are not rocket science.....its not hard to produce an affordable wire that does the job well although it will cost more most likely if not made in CHina or similar. |
Well, it appears that more ASR minions have landed (Sinad Measurement guy must have called for help, called in the reinforcements to flood this site). Well, as you boys can see (over and over), this guy measures a dac and throws you some sinad numbers, which forms the basis for his ranking system/purchase guide. He will tell you that’s all there is to it....some low IQ sinad (his path to glory). But, there’s a lot more you could do with FPGA, etc. When you all dump 10k, 20k, etc on your dacs, there are a lot of tricks contained within such a dac. You can deploy algorithms to pull a bunch of spatial info, deploy hrtf filters, create some level of surround virtualization, etc. When you hear some dacs, all of a sudden, you heard some depth and layering n all? almost sounds like spatial audio, surround effects at times, eh? That’s right, many of these effects can be attributed to what’s hidden away inside fpga, etc. The dac manufacturer isn’t gonna reveal all his in-house secrets to you, but, you can be rest assured that the above mentioned (or similar) is what’s being deployed. To reiterate, this guy’s IQ is just not high enough to measure anything on the above mentioned for ya (he wouldn’t know about it)...Sinad is all there is w.r.t ASR minions. Hence, if you just look at his low IQ sinad charts and made your purchase decision, you could get fooled. Good luck to y’all Audigons.
P.S. I can train a 12 yr old to operate my AP kit spit out the same charts. Don't get fooled because you saw a fancy lookin chart that isn't something you see everyday (in your regular line of work). |
You "every DAC sounds the same" guys should watch this video (from the beginning......don’t go to the conclusion first). This is an A/B with a $2700 and a $6000 DAC. He does not tell you which DAC is which until the conclusion. If you cannot hear the difference between the DACs in the first few seconds of the first change.....then you are either deaf or really, really stubborn. Recorded using Schoeps mics and 32 bit recorder. This guy has lots of videos done this way......very easy to hear the difference between DACs and amps. and I am listening through $29 Altec computer speakers. Both of these DACs are way, way more transparent than a Topping DAC.....Do they measure as good?.....probably not.
|
@jimofoakcreek Mr. Amir disagrees with you with this statement: "we absolutely can measure the differences between cables. The question is do those measurements matter as far as the perception, and the short answer is they don't" This in itself is contradictory to what Amir professes, that the measurements are the only bases to judge the equipment. Anyway, thank you for allowing people to spend their money as they wish and enjoy the results. I appreciate it. BTW there is no "NRG Thunder" cable in Audioquest lineup. |
That's an interesting claim. What measurements have you made on what cords to reach the conclusion?
Incredible - you're actually granting us your permission for us to buy what we like. Dude, you have a problem. |
Looks like the softening up is working, permitting the more trollish and boorish to hash over the extremes and paint everything they don't like with a broad brush. That analogy of oh those some many miles of cabling before it gets to your place has been shot down time and again. All those substations, annexes, transformers and cabling alter the power in ways that would not resemble what it measures as when it finally reaches your home. It's not some invisible, constant never changing force being shuttled to your door. What matters is how it's intended to be when it at last gets to your outlet and measures are taken to ensure it doesn't vary much, especially as much as it did during it's journey carried over aluminum lines. Would you have your PC made out of aluminum? So yes, it is those last three feet that matter since most people don't go around trying to directly connect stuff to the Romex. Granted, they charge more than it's worth but who doesn't nowadays? I have a few PCs from TWL and some from Zu Audio and a few others and there's clearly a difference in sound staging, dynamics, and frequency extension. Until the fetish of measuring everything to death and making a cottage industry out of it, we've always relied on our ears and yes, some fell prey to marketing and peer pressure but stop with this throwing the baby out with the bathwater malarkey. One can always get better performance for not so dear a price as the one you brought up and to keep citing the extremes doesn't bode well for those arguments. Do your thing and leave others to do the same. Before this measurement fetish took hold, members were politely cautioned about price/performance matters and not to fall for the hype. It's always been done that way, but now, it's one big crusade that requires total subjugation, enabling all that dopamine and serotonin to flow again for that big, fat rush. All the best, |
Some of you claim you can hear the difference between power cables. Measurements don’t verify any of it. But if you want to pay up for expensive power cords go for it. It’s your money.
Here’s a $1200 power cord for you, the AudioQuest NRG Thunder. It uses ‘long grain copper’ 😜
Without making any measurements let’s just use common sense. Electrical power is conducted through miles of cable, substations at high voltage and numerous transformers before reaching your house. Then it runs through your electrical panel, circuit breakers, and the Romex cable in your house wiring. So AudioQuest would have you believe that the last 3’ of their ‘long grain copper’ power cord 🤭 is going to improve the sound of your amplifier and charge you $1200 for that.
If you believe that stuff and are willing to pay up, go for it.
|
Just wait until those ASR guys learn that much of science is based on human sense (and has its own biases)! Boy, if only those kids could read...
|
@markwd Thanks for clearing that up as it never made sense to me the way I perceived it. All the best, |
Men buy hifis because they like what they hear. Women buy handbags because they like what they see. Same thing, different sense used. Everyone has an opinion and they are all different. How to decide which opinions are best? Take a guess. It starts with the letter M. The only way to meaningfully compare options is to quantify the options somehow. If it can’t be quantified the decision is a crapshoot and the odds are not in your favor. |
