Accuracy is a myth in audio playback, no system sounds like live unamplified music, so why not just use what you enjoy to listen to.
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
That aside, was this whole thread a farce? You actually don't want to see measurements for cables? You were playing with us? Are you here to throw more spitballs again? The guy that measures doesn't have any measurements about his own system? Embarrassing. If you are experiencing "technical difficulties" please post what they are and I am sure I can help, NP. |
@invalid
Don't tell that to a lot of people around here. Many think the purpose of the audio system is to replicate live music! But yes, you are right that a recording is never the same as a live presentation. Once created though, you don't want to a) put in tweaks that make no audible difference but cost money and b) overlay the same tonality on everything you play. If you do, that is fine but just don't advocate it as being "higher fidelity." Mind you, as you say, you are welcome to do (b) but just don't keep saying that is what people should do. Studies show that we all like accurate sound when only the ear is involved.
|
Well you made a big mistake. If I predict the outcome of a coin flip, do you think I can do that forever? It could be pure luck, right? What if I did that twice in a row? Still could be luck. How about 4 times? Yes, it could still be luck. Indeed I have run blind tests where I got it right 4 or 5 times only to completely fail after that. If you go back to the start of the video I linked to, I explain the above. And how claims of "I ran a blind test" mean nothing unless they are repeated and backed by that statistical analysis to reduce the chances of pure luck. For this reason I keep saying run a test 10 times and see if 8 out of that many tests you can identify the cable. If a cable is "MUCH" better, you should be able to tell it apart 20 times and still get it right. So fire up your camera, start shooting a video of how many times in a row you can tell that cable from another. Then we have something to talk about. Until then, the only thing you demonstrated is that you still don't know how to properly get to audio truth. Also, nothing about your anecdote validates the requirement for 100 hours of break in. You need to go and get a fresh cable and compare it to the 100 hour broken one and see if you can get at least 8 out of 10 times right. You say the company gives you 30 days free trial. So when can be expect this result? Until then, your starting claim in ASR that Audioquest cable needed 100 hours of break in before testing is just nonsense. Heck, that cable is even different than yours so how can you claim both need the same 100 hours??? |
- 518 posts total