A scientifically established fact on limits of human perception can easily be misapplied. Take for instance the claim that a light blinking fast enough will appear to be not blinking to the human eye that’s looking straight at it. This is true and demonstrable, but someone might say something like "If it’s blinking at a certain speed you can’t detect with your eye that it’s blinking." That’s not true, because as you sweep your vision across you do detect that it is blinking. So there’s a fact that’s been well established and then there’s a story about that fact that isn’t really true. I don’t know that I can come up with a really good comparison with audio but one might be masking effects. MP3 data compression relies on known tonal masking effects in human perception to throw away data that you "can’t hear" anyway. This may work better in some situations than others. I recall listening to a recording of the cocktail party effect, where on the recording you can hear a whole bunch of voices talking at once but can’t really make out a word anyone is saying because they all mask each other. In stereo over speakers I still couldn’t make out a conversation. Because it was, I believe, a binaural recording using a dummy head, when listened to over headphones or using a divider plate between my speakers to prevent crosstalk, I suddenly could make out a nearby conversation because spacial cues became available to more distinctly separate it in distance from the surrounding hubbub. So why am I bringing this up? I’m just wanting to acknowledge that while I really appreciate reviews with measurements like ASR does, I do acknowledge that there’s a strong possibility that there are things being missed that are audible. I think it's a worthy effort to keep trying to find ways to measure everything we perceive and enjoy in audio. With more understanding we have a better chance of more consistently getting the perception that we want.
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?
- ...
- 1312 posts total
That's especially true because ASR doesn't bother to listen to everything it measures. Without correlation to what we hear, the measurements don't have much value. |
Audio Science Review. Is interesting but measurements are just that. Several amps might have similar specs but one could sound bright, another less bright but bass strong, the next might have a great Soundstage but lack midrange. I heard the difference. I will never forget the Mark Levenson monos system I heard in the 1980s using a Lynn Sondeck, wow! I don’t remember the model. I think they said it was 10wph? Unbelievable. Really thumped low and sounded perfect to me. |
I find this fascinating. It seems folks want a universal evaluation system that ranks audio equipment on an irrefutable, absolute scale. Hint - it ain’t never gonna happen! ASR performs testing and reports results of common parameters such as noise and distortion, frequency response, dynamic range, jitter, S/N ratio, and other comparisons using their own test equipment. This is simply objective information. In some cases, their test results do not align with manufacturer’s claims. Again, simply information. The issues here seem to be that Amir’s subjective opinions about the gear tested often do not align with the opinions of many here. In addition, the mental route Amir takes to reach his subjective conclusions does not align with many here who put a much greater emphasis on listening, while they believe Amir puts a greater emphasis on test results. Big deal. Read the test results for what they are, and form your own opinions on the items tested based on your own listening. As some have pointed out, systems, rooms, and listener’s preferences are all different so it is no shocker that people come to different conclusions on what sounds good to them. It is Amir’s site, so he can state his opinion and how he arrives at it. Nobody (including Amir) is making anybody agree with Amir. If you disagree with Amir’s subjective opinions, the objective test results, and the pink panther, then why are you even reading the site? Or, is it a case where everybody who owns an audio system has to think alike? It really is ok to disagree, and the absence of consensus is more expected than surprising. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that universal evaluation system. |
- 1312 posts total