Audio Science Review = Rebuttal and Further Thoughts

Isn't it funny that there's no Food Science Review, filled with devotees who claim that coffee and wine notes are imaginary, that herbs must be measured by % points of acidity, and using your own feelings to create and taste dishes is foolish?

But food and audio are very similar - many things which can and cannot be measured, but ultimately being decided by our senses as the ultimate measurement tools. 

Imagine the engineers behind stoves and microwaves tearing down professional chefs for cooking based on their feelings. Yet that what ASR is to audio.

I have to presume you haven't really spent a lot of time on ASR

I agree. Only a person who is insane can spend considerable time there. When the leader of a forum states that "I know all I have to know" to begin a discussion, that is the time you know that it's a closed forum and nothing can be gained by spending time with them.

good cross-talk measurements, proper balance in both channels reaching the ear etc

Very good point. And do all the folks have the exact same ear cavity size, etc? What if some people are hard of hearing, or some people are extra sensitive? You folks realize that not all people hear the same...right? But do you know, the ear sends the "vibration/sound" signal to the brain to process it further? Yes, I called it the "vibration/sound" because, till the brain completely processes it completely, we cannot identify what it is.

Then the following happens, as explained on brainfacts.org:

The next stop for sound processing is the thalamus. Located just above the brainstem, the thalamus is the brain’s relay station for incoming sensory information. Then the information travels to the auditory part of the cerebral cortex.
The brainstem and thalamus use the information from both ears to compute a sound’s direction and location. In the primary auditory cortex different auditory neurons respond to different frequencies, which maintains the frequency map generated by the hair cells. Some cortical neurons respond to sound qualities including intensity, duration, or a change in frequency, while others are selective for complex sounds. Still others specialize in various combinations of tones. At higher levels in the brain, neurons can process harmony, rhythm, and melody. These neurons combine the different types of auditory information so you can recognize a voice or instrument.

I don't think anyone has any instrument to test how person A perceives the same sound compared to person B. As far as I have read and understood - brain is a super complex organ. I believe the scientists community thinks that we hardly know how a brain functions (completely). Of course, the ASR community who mention their PhD, BEEE, MSc, position at Microsoft, etc probably know how brain works like the back of their hand. Unfortunately not many humans are as enlightened as these ASR souls.

No it is a cult and if you question the leader you get booted. I did. 

I can't imagine why you might ever get booted from a forum.

measurements need to reflect reality. Unfortunately acoustics at this stage of scientific development is more art than science.….and being doctrinaire about using measurements when they don‘t reflect reality is very dogmatic, not scientific.

I agree, but none of that means that any wacky audiophile claim, or any marketing claim made for a product, is legit.  We have to have some way to winnow out b.s. from the real. 

Remember that almost all high end audio present their claims as technical claims of one sort or another.  They are either explicit, or allude to some technical "problem" their products address in getting us "closer to the music."  The technical claims can be addressed via technical inquiry by a knowledgeable person with equipment.  Notice virtually no manufacturer actually corrects Amir, as in "no, you are measuring the wrong things...HERE is how we measured the phenomenon we claim to have addressed in our product."   It never moves beyond marketing.  (The one attempt I've seen was by PS Audio...but their attempt to rebut Amir by showing how they would measure their product flopped pretty badly). 

So mere assertions of dogma are neither here nor there.  People either have better evidence or arguments against what Amir has concluded...or they don't.

As I said, his reviews receive quite a bit of scrutiny on ASR by technically knowledgeable members.  I find the critiques of some tests by ASR members FAR more pointed and convincing than those outside...especially in threads like this.

Which is why I find it silly to presume ASR is some lock-step cult where everyone just uncritically accepts whatever Amir says.   I myself have been in plenty of dust-ups with Amir. 

I agree. Only a person who is insane can spend considerable time there.

I guess I've just been diagnosed as insane ;-)

When the leader of a forum states that "I know all I have to know" to begin a discussion,

I don't know where that quote comes from, but in any case it's cherry picking to seize on one thing he (or anyone else) may have said at one point, to ignore all the other reasonable claims and tests he has produced.  THAT is a form of motivated self-blindness in itself.  It's like twitter-think.

I've heavily disagreed with Amir on a number of issues, but see that on other things he has made a very good case.  Someone looking for an out will seize on something Amir said they don't like.  Someone interested in truth and intellectually honest conversation will have a wider view and note there may be "good" with the "bad."

 

that is the time you know that it's a closed forum and nothing can be gained by spending time with them.

What do you think of someone who insists his perception is so reliable he can not be wrong?  That is essentially the basis of the Golden Ear cohort of audiophiles who push back on every single argument/measurement/counter-evidence with the claim "But I Know What I Heard So I Know What I Know And You Can't Tell Me Otherwise!"

How much do you expect to gain from that?