@fleschler you have good point! I know some important performance metrics are not disclosed because companies are too greedy, competition, standards are not consistent or detailed, third party test LABs are getting the best - tuned samples, for qualification and publicity.
Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?
After my Audio Science Review review forum, it became apparent that nearly the only way one can determine the measurements of an audio product is wait for a review on line or in a publication. Most equipment is never reviewed or is given a subjective analysis rather than a measurement oriented review. One would think that manufacturers used tests and measurements to design and construct their products.
Manufacturers routinely give the performance characteristics of their products as Specifications. Those are not test measurements.
I searched the Revel speaker site for measurements of any of their speakers and could not find any. Revels are universally lauded for their exceptional reviewed measurements. Lack of published manufacturer measurements is true for nearly every speaker manufacturer I've searched for on line, perhaps several hundred. Same is true for amps, pre-amps, DACs, transports, turntables, well you get the picture. Do they have something to hide? I doubt the good quality products have anything to hide but poor quality products do.
ASR prides itself in providing "true" measurements that will aid in purchase decisions. Why don't the manufacturers provide these measurements so that reviewers can test if they are truthful or not?
Then there are the cables and tweaks for which I suspect that there are inadequate tests available to measure sonically perceived differences but which objectivists believe don't exist or are "snake oil."
Well, please chime in if you have some illuminating thoughts on the subject.
I would have loved to see manufacturers measurements on my equipment and especially those that I rejected.
- ...
- 518 posts total
@mitch2 When I look(ed) for components, the specs (hopefully honestly) told me data I could use to assemble synergy. After having owned inefficient speakers and 20 years of electrostats, i decided I preferred conventional multi-driver dynamic speakers. Amps to match the speakers and pre-amps to match the amps (Such as my 1990s Audio Research SP-14 and Classic 60-a great match). Cartridge specs to match the arm. Unfortunately, there is a lack of information for cables and tweaks (usually none). Trial and error are the remaining methods. I don’t use blind tests as I have both Golden Ear friends who are also remastering engineers (with their own and different audio systems) and friends and family who come over and listen for hours. The untrained listeners have enjoyed music at my home for decades, regardless that I heard the problems with the reproduction as much as the good sound. As I have become a better listener, I also can point out subtle differences and evaluate them over time. I only want to make changes to my system if the change is dramatically better. I’ve dismissed probably 75% of subtle change equipment (mostly tweaks and cables), maybe more. I auditioned 11 footers for my pre-amp and isolation transformer (Bryston BIT20) as the two dealers asked for my opinion and sent them to me free. Only one was extraordinarily bad and I tried it under every piece of equipment (except my turntable) but always resulting in a lugubrious paced sound, certainly a black background as advertised, but dark and muddy (Magico Q Pods). And why do high end/expensive tweaks and cables have to be packaged like jewelry? Why are some footers packaged in elephant foot proof padded cases (Q Pods for instance)? Is it just a vanity item for some (YES)! My Synergistic Research power outlets, fuses and HFTs come very simply packaged in foam in paper boxes. That’s all they require. |
ASR is a joke for people who want to think that their $500 (insert source piece of equipment here) is just as good, if not better than a $15000 (insert source piece of equipment). ASR's "measurements" PROVE it's better! They lost me for good after hooking up a $400 power cable to a $500 DAC and then stating that it measures, and therefore sounds, exactly the same as a $30 power cable hooked to the same DAC. Uh-huh. The entire process is flawed. |
@coralkong Really? Or course! That's why I tell non-audiophiles not to purchase expensive cables or tweaks because they won't hear a difference if the rest of their system is below mid-fi. The reverse is true as well. Imagine, my neighbor's $1/2 million system and he was strangling the sound using Pangea power cables (he has high end speaker, ICs and digital cabling). Once he replaced them with superior design and manufactured cables, he (and I) now enjoy great sound. Slightly different take: I chose not to upgrade my cartridge to a $4K Hana Umami Red despite it probably sounding great on my hot stampers but possibly not as great on the vast majority of my LPs I'm using a Dynavector 20X2 L and a Zesto Allesso SUT $3.6K (paid 50%) which is great sounding for all my LPs. I paid more for the SUT than the cartridge but I will never have to upgrade my SUT again. |
I already corrected you on this in the last thread. Here is the results of a recent review again: As you see the analyzer has no problem measuring dynamic range of 130 dB for this DAC. Your 124 dB DAC is good but is 6 dB or one whole bit worse than this unit. If you are charging more than a few hundred dollars for it, I suggest going back and redesigning it to lower its noise unless you are having noise pollution as you mention. You also looked up the wrong spec for APx555 analyzer. The -117 dB is THD+N. This is a worst case spec (company is very conservative in this manner). I am able to measure THD+N to -124 dB: With FFT analysis like above, we can dig as low as we want as far as distortion spikes anyway.
|
- 518 posts total