Audio Science Review = Rebuttal and Further Thoughts

@prof Unless you have viewed the parts and design of both the Benchmark and Emotiva YOU have no basis to doubt me. Not only that, I think that the Benchmark DAC I use has superior engineering, possibly due to their particular asynchronous oversampling. I never said that Benchmark makes a bad product-they make good products that could be elevated to high end quality. And the Emotiva is a true bargain to upgrade.

Junk parts-for high end audio, it’s using 50¢ regulators used in ordinary industrial use such as in computers rather than $30-$50 audio quality regulators. Maybe you think capacitors are all the same and sound the same if they measure the same. They don’t. Sometimes less expensive audio quality caps sound better than expensive caps in audio equipment but using industrial use caps in high end audio is a joke which the internet is replete with information on which cap sounds different from one another. They don’t use industrial caps in high end audio equipment for a very good reason-they don’t sound good.

The reason better and typically more expensive parts are NOT used is for economic reasons-the price the product increases, sometimes exponentially.  Benchmark and Emotiva provide reliable audio equipment at a price point.  

 

fleschler

 

You’d written about the Benchmark LA4 preamp:

"There is a cure for the Benchmark. Replace the computer quality, cheap-ass regulators, power and filter caps, maybe parts of the audio board, the Op-amp, etc. with audio (much more costly) parts. Benchmark products are only okay stock but can be great when modified. "

A ’cure?’

The Benchmark LA4 is among the most transparent, lowest distortion consumer audio products you can buy! They set out for "benchmark" transparency and accuracy and achieved it. They would have used whatever components necessary, but they knew what type of components would make a difference and which wouldn’t. That’s because they are actual highly qualified engineers, not merely audiophiles claiming Golden Ears.

Amir measured the LA4 and it’s low distortion was off-the-charts:

 

John Atkinson measured the LA4 and was similarly blown away:

 

Some distortion products measured "close to the residual level of these harmonics in my Audio Precision SYS2722’s signal generator."  (The Audio Precision is far more sensitive than our ears - that's the point of such an instrument in the first place!)

JA stated at the end:

"Benchmark's LA4 is the widest-bandwidth, widest-dynamic-range, lowest-noise, lowest-distortion preamplifier I have encountered."

And yet you are telling me it could be better with some other parts. Show me any pre-amp that measures better, using whatever parts you claim will work better. It must be well hidden because JA, who probably measures more preamps/amps than anyone else, hasn’t seen it!

You see, there are people who actually produce objective evidence for a product, then people who make claims, mostly based on their belief in their Golden Ears, but without any objective evidence to back it up. I’m much more persuaded by evidence, than mere claims.

 

 

 

 

People “making claims” is typically people sharing experiences. If you are not interested is these people sharing experiences, you can disregard them. Simple. No? Golden ears or not… does it matter?

Then you go to the ASR party line:

without any objective evidence to back it up

So I am really confused.

But then agaiN;

I’m much more persuaded by evidence, than mere claims.

So this tells me all I need to know about what I need to know where one belongs in the Great Debate spectrum. Which is fine. But why do you have to mask it.

There is no such thing as EVIDENCE. One has to figure out him/her self. No other way around. How? Whether by trusting own senses (listening) or by reading Amir’s measurements, does not matter. Pick your method. Just don’t shove YOUR method to other peoples throats

 

 

@thyname

People “making claims” is typically people sharing experiences.

Yes, we are making truth claims all the time. It’s how humans work.

But some are greater reaching than others. fleschler is putting forth all sorts of technical claims regarding electronics and engineering. Is there some reason you think that’s ok, but putting forth a contrasting viewpoint is not ok? We are exchanging viewpoints. Is more than one viewpoint ok, I hope?

So I am really confused.

Perhaps because you are trying to fit people in to single camps or boxes.

Again: I highly value the subjective aspects of this hobby - the exchanging of notes, trying to put sound in to words. I think this CAN be not only richly rewarding and fun, but also useful, insofar as a careful listener can put what he/she hears in to words. I’ve been led to plenty of happy audio encounters and gear purchases via the reports of other audiophiles and subjective reviews. I’ve also played a part in leading some people to gear they loved as well.

Over on ASR that doesn’t go down so well. There is a high degree of suspicion regarding sighted or reports on equipment that consist only of subjective impressions. So it’s just not welcoming so some of the aspects I personally highly value in the hobby. So places like Agon can fulfill that itch to talk about stuff from our impressions. Great stuff.

Also, ASR does not generally tell people "What You Should Buy" so much as they provide lots of objectively verified information about audio gear, explaining the relevance of the data. So you don’t "have" to buy anything in particular; you can just pick and choose whatever data may inform you in your own goals. That’s how I approach the site.

However, the emphasis on engineering/measurements naturally tends to have a goal "what measures BETTER and what measurements make for BETTER gear?"

So there is a fairly heavy selection force in terms of what amplifier measurements are "good" and what speaker measurements are "good" and therefore there is a sort of narrowing of the pool of gear seen as "good." So there is, to my mind, a narrowing of the scope of gear there, too much for my own tastes.

Hear on Agon I can see and engage in a wider range of gear I’m interested in reading about or trying.

On the other hand, I’m very aware of how easily a purely subjective approach to everything - a "Take Your Perception As The Ultimate Reliable Tool" for evaluating audio gear - leads naturally to tons of b.s., snake oil and pseudo-science-type claims being accepted and disseminated.

So, yes, I love the subjective aspect of the hobby, but I don’t consider it fool-proof, I’m aware of the liabilities, and I prefer not to believe b*llsh*t as far as I can help it. I usually want to spend my money on things that actually make an audible difference. Places like ASR can help folks find their way through some of the b.s. claims that arise in the audiophile world.  If an Agon member is describing the sound of something plausible - e.g. the difference between speakers, or maybe even some tube amps etc - I'm all ears.  I know it's not fool-proof, but practically speaking I'm fine with accepting he's hearing differences.  But when it moves in to the highly contested, technically dubious areas, then personally I want stronger evidence than some audiophile's say-so and "I'm Just Sure I Heard It."  YMMV.

I’m glad that both types of sites exist, because I find value in each, and also some faults in each (for my purposes).

There is no such thing as EVIDENCE.

I’m afraid that statement seems to make no sense. You go right on to discuss forms of evidence after that statement.

How? Whether by trusting own senses (listening) or by reading Amir’s measurements, does not matter. Pick your method. Just don’t shove your method to other peoples throats

I agree that we are all free to choose the method we want for evaluating and buying our gear. I’ve said this many times. No audiophile needs to become an engineer or do science to buy gear. No audiophile needs to learn a single thing about how the gear works. To each his own.

But who is "shoving their method down people’s throats?"

I don’t see anyone doing this. I see people explaining various approaches, and that will for some people (like Amir) advocating or making recommendations. But since when is that "shoving a method down people’s throat?"

He’s got a web site you can choose not to visit. He’s got a youtube channel you never have to watch. He’s not coming jackbooted knocking down your door insisting you change your gear! Nor am I. Nor, as far as I recall, are other people in this or the other thread.

I see a common bias in your reply, where if you have one viewpoint and someone presents a different one, you just take yours as an assumed default, and therefore the other person’s view is taken as some assault on your own. THEY are the ones "pushing their view" and so you don’t notice yourself, or others with your view, "pushing" your view. People here are declaring all the time People Should Listen And Decide For Themselves! Use Your Ears! That’s How To Evaluate Equipment!"

Plenty of audio reviews, e.g. Darko, are continually saying this. But I haven’t seen you pushback on that as "shoving a method down people’s throats" because, likely, it happens to conform to your own approach. So, I argue, there is a natural asymmetry and blind-spot in your complaints.

@prof : I completely miss the point of your dissertation. But I am not a professor. My reply I thought was pretty simple. 
 

You say:

I’m much more persuaded by evidence, than mere claims.

May I ask: how do you find your evidence? What “persuades” you? 
 

To be clear, it has never been my intention to persuade anyone by sharing my experiences (or “making claims” as you call it). Anything I have ever posted