I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.


I just can't clear my head of this. I don't want to start a measurements vs listening war and I'd appreciate it if you guys don't, but I bought a Rogue Sphinx V3 as some of you may remember and have been enjoying it quite a bit. So, I head over to AVS and read Amir's review and he just rips it apart. But that's OK, measurements are measurements, that is not what bugs me. I learned in the early 70s that distortion numbers, etc, may not be that important to me. Then I read that he didn't even bother listening to the darn thing. That is what really bugs me. If something measures so poorly, wouldn't you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear? Do people still buy gear on measurements alone? I learned that can be a big mistake. I just don't get it, never have. Can anybody provide some insight to why some people are stuck on audio measurements? Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep. 

128x128russ69

@realworldaudio , I feel most of what you wrote is made up. I don’t think you will be able to clearly articulate what is missing from the measurements and certainly not 95% of the things that are missing. Perhaps this is the issue. This sounds more like outrage mob mentality that reasonsed criticism. I am welcome to be proven wrong.

 

What is missing from the meassurements is the way the gear will interact with the other piece of gear in a specific room for specific ears...Listening is mandatory here...And what is missing are the unknown or/and   the non selected possible measures too...No one selected ALL POSSIBLE measures...Which one set matter is not absolute certainty in all case...

 The "Selected"  by Amir  isolated measures from a single piece of gear means not much for the final listening test...Save for the designer itself going on with his engineering designing standards confronting them to Amir own results.....

By the way you cannot be proven wrong because you COULD not be even wrong ever in this case : if from Amir measures you deduced " an hypothetical sound quality level" which will never be proven to exist IN ITSELF without linking this piece of gear to some other interacting system parts in some controlled or uncontrolled room and to some specific ears in a LISTENING EXPERIMENTS ...

Room are also like headphones, ultimately they can be fit for one pair of specific ears ...Studio acoustic is not Hall acoustic and neither of them is small room acoustic...Why? geometry, size, topology, acoustic content and in the case of a small room ONE listener with specific hearing history and taste not many recording engineers or a crowd...

 

 

 

I am certain I asked the question of @realworldaudio . Would it not be appropriate to let him/her answer?

It is a public thread discussion... And you accuse him of mob mentality...

You cannot accuse me of that mob mentality no?

I presented arguments... You dont want articulated arguments ?... You prefer mob mentality discussion with deluded audiophiles?

i apologize in this case...

In a discussion logic is a large two-way road that MANY people can take at the same time if it is not a mob mentality discussion for sure... i take the road...I apologize to you also for that anyway and to realworldaudio too ...But i am sure you like logic and he surely like logic too... We all hate mob mentality...

I am certain I asked the question of @realworldaudio . Would it not be appropriate to let him/her answer?

 

 

 

 

 

I thought it was well understood that measurements are a valid place to start from, but by no means the be-all-end-all.  Ears are.

People sometimes prefer the sound of things that are measurably “worse” than other things, i.e. analog vs. digital, tubes vs. solid state, etc.

I feel to keep oneself sane in pursuit of great sound, measurements provide consistent repeatable parameters, but not necessarily the final word, though perhaps sometimes they do.