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?  

fleschler

@invalid BINGO!!!

I was a commercial property appraiser (to be distinguished from residential) for 32 years, constructed apartment buildings and single family tract homes.  I chose/use higher quality materials in low income housing to prevent future repair expenses and the safety of my tenants.  I use higher quality all brass plumbing fixtures and fittings,  only schedule L US or Mexican manufactured copper plumbing and best quality fittings, Bradford-White water heaters, Wilkins water pressure regulators, etc. as an example.  Sure, Loews has cheaper plumbing items, but you get what you pay for-expect plumbing failures sooner (a few years) rather than in decades later (w.h. exceptions since they only last 6 years now).  

@milpai  Every night I get to listen to music for 2 hours prior to bedtime.  Yesterday, I listened with friends for 4 hours.   My main audio system is so addictive and I have 42,500 LPs/CD/78s that I look forward to listening whenever I have a chance.  I am retired from my profession and only work about 20 hours weekly as an investor/manager.  I also take care of my family until it's music listening time late at night.  

I had some time to see my forum posts today so I added rejoiners.  My other forums over the past 20+ years only received no or up to four replies.   I obviously hit a nerve and this forum is probably the most popular of September.   I am concerned that ASR may have a physically violent "militia" although it is more likely that they just have much free time and personal angst they have to relieve themselves by posting on ASR, so often and often negatively.  

@amir_asr cool of you to show up. i have a question - would you say that "if

[insert audiophile claim] can't be measured by my tests, it doesn't exist" is a fair description of your view? why or why not? 

@fleschler

ASR "militia" cannot differentiate the difference between biographical summary of one’s music expertise versus self-aggrandizement I am no more important than any other audiophile; however, music experience as an amateur recording engineer in major orchestral halls of well over 250 recordings and for the Erich Zeisl (brother in law of Schoenberg) centenary collection of 11 CDs for Vienna, UCLA and USC establish some credentials that my opinion in how vocal, chamber and orchestral music can (not should) sound is evident. I do not have a "golden ear." I just have a lifetime of experience performing and recording/mastering music.

This is a common retort.  That you have been either producing music for many years or an audiophile for the same and hence your impressions are correct.  Fact is that none of this trains you to a) be a critical listener and b) make your listening tests reliable.  This is not only position of audio research but also my personal professional experience.  In my last corporate job, we performed controlled listening tests of hundreds of audiophiles and sadly, they way underperformed our trained testers in hearing compression artifacts.

Research work would be so much easier if we could just recruit people like you and render an opinion about sound fidelity with no controls. But it is not. The only way we know you speak the "truth" about fidelity is to block all other stimulus than the sound arriving at your ear.  And further, repeat observations many times to rule out chance. Nothing replaces this.  Every shortcut to that is prone to serious faults.

This is an uncomfortable truth for many of us. After all, we call ourselves audiophiles with the intent of saying we know what good sound is like. But it is the nature of how we behave as humans.

You can argue with this and create your own domain of audio not based on realities of decades of research. That is fine. But please don't throw rocks at me at ASR or the membership for using proper science and research as compass of what is right.

 

Adding on to above, post, I have zero skills in recording, mixing and mastering music. In those domains, your experience blows me out of water.  So there is no attempt to put that experience down in the slightest. It is just that it doesn't apply to the topic at hand (reproducing of recorded music as opposed to creating it).