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.
@russ69 has provided information recently that he is domiciled in SoCal. That outfit is in Queensland. "I’m Kevin, I’m from Queensland, and I’m here to help." |
@russ69 if you are in Socal here is a list of dealers: |
@kota1 - thanks for posting cable study paper link! that “ paper “ captures most of important IC parameters for passive circuits. unfortunately, audio system is more complex than that, and has sources and receivers built of active circuits. active circuits can add “audible” ringing to the signal, if cable parameters push circuit phase margin below targeted value. EMI/RF noise also can be audible, because not all sensitive amplifiers have enough high frequency noise rejection, to withstand modern days RF noise in our living spaces. depending on modulation technique, RF noise can be heard as additional “unexplained" noise affecting SQ. phono-pre could be a good example of sensitive active circuit usage, and therefore it is very hard to find good match between cartridge, cable, and phono-pre, to achieve excellent SQ. |
@westcoastaudiophile In my experience you don’t notice the amount of RF noise in your system until you remove it and then you are like WOW. So many companies dealing with this problem and all of them taking a slightly different tact. It will never be perfect and to your point, trial and error is a process that can take time and $$$. I decided to address it as best I can. Here is another paper you might enjoy that discusses "perceived" sound quality. Check fig 5 on page 408 to see the RFI difference between the two cables in the study. If you want to go deeper I go through the bibliography and read the supporting research that interests me: "This work shows that two system configurations differing only by the interconnect pathway are audibly discernable, even by average listeners with no special experience in music or audio." (4. Conclusions pg 409) Cable pathways between audio components can affect perceived sound quality |
@holmz Guess it is to nuanced, The Nobel Prize. Must be a Down Under thing? Just having some fun.
|
