Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

I want to thank the Audiogon moderator for permitting this forum to continue and expose the narrowmindedness of the "objectivist" measurement is the gold standard for determining audio equipment quality. 

Except it hasn't really worked out that way.  Kind of the reverse if anything.

I mean...you think Your Ears are the ultimate arbiter for sonic quality, right?

You'll believe what Your Ears tell you, whatever objective evidence Amir might bring against the plausibility of your belief.  Or, am I wrong about that?

The ASR site/Amir has not extended a mutual openness to permitting our members from participating on their rebuttal forum or their site. 

That's quite a spin.

Another way of seeing it:  Generally speaking, Amir does not care for his forum to be a place simply to gripe about other audio sites.  He or the moderators have closed a number of such threads once they seem to have gone down that route.

He'd rather the conversations be about audio, vetting claims made for equipment,  vs griping about people in other forums.  That certainly doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  But generally speaking, in the context of the fact everyone including Amir is fallible, he's often trying to take the higher road in that regard.  (And unfortunately  some folks will unfairly take Amir's tests and technical claims as threats or insults to their own beliefs, and just impute ill will or dogmatism.  That happened in this thread too).

On the other hand, you are happy to see a thread here that continues to berate the Amir and the ASR crowd.

Personally I'm happy to see this thread continue insofar as some fruitful dialogue can happen among some of us.  But I don't think the very fact this thread is continuing is necessarily taking the higher road.  "Amir shut down griping about us, but we didn't shut down griping about them!  Hurray for us!"

@crymeanaudioriver i am not talking about physical ability (or limitations). i am referring to the unique circumstances in our lives that inform our personal, emotional responses to experiences. 

@prof I agree with you there. As I have stated, equipment should be selected based on one’s personal preference, engagement with the music. It should be listened to in "a system" "in a room" (preferably the room the music is to be heard). Typically, this means one’s own audio equipment in one’s home.

One of my audio dealers told me a story about hearing a pair of ($40,000) speakers at an audio show. He thought they were fantastic and purchased them. He brought them home and found out that he disliked them with his system in him room. He vowed never to buy speakers based on a show again and cautioned me not to do the same.

@nonoise +10 Amir acknowledged that I have superior experience in performing and recording in major venues. @crymeanaudioriver has a lesser view of me. Too bad.

invalid,

blind testing is not the answer, you might pick out a speaker in blind testing and hate it once you listen to it for a while in your room.

That's conjecture though.  How often has that claim been born out?

Again, knowledge is power, and if you understand enough about speaker measurements and your room, there is some level of predictive power about the sound. 

Further, speaker design has actually been advancing due to all the blind testing research that identified what type of resonances and anomalies we tend to identify as unnatural or sounding poor.  More and more companies are using this information in their design, even purchase Klippel Analyser Systems (like Amir uses - Magico for instance now uses the Klippel and designs with goals similar to that targets that arose out of the scientific research.

KEF has had enormous success with their designs, especially as they also have been designing their speakers ever closer to the "best practice measurements" goals that arose from blind-research.  So there really is a through-line from the studies to what many people will hear as Good Sound.  It doesn't necessarily predict what any particular individual will choose, but it's clearly been helpful.

Like I said before look what blind taste tests gave us the new coke, where is that product now?

A single such instance isn't an argument against the usefulness of blind testing.

That said, I think the New Coke Problem could be raised against the type of blind tests used at, say, the Harman Kardon facilities - that is, do some speakers sound better in the shorter time period quick-switching scenario of such tests, but don't necessarily predict long time satisfaction?  I think that's a possible flaw.  But it might actually have been addressed, I can't remember at the moment.  And it also seems fairly doubtful to me.

But to grant the proposition that people prefer X speakers in blind tests is useful does NOT mean it therefore predicts customer satisfaction per se.  Clearly plenty of audiophiles have found satisfaction with a wide variety of speaker designs over the years.  All sorts of confounding factors occur once you are in to the real world.

fleschler

If it hasn't been clear: my own approach is mostly like yours.  I always want to hear

gear for myself, rather than rely on measurements.  I think that is for me the most reliable method for getting satisfaction.

But, again for myself, I'd put things like tube amps and speakers in that category.

With so many manufacturers of cables, tweaks etc vying for my time and money, I find the information from places like ASR help inform my choices as to what is most likely worthwhile or not.