2. tech-talk
  3. 183130-162255

I Am Tired of Bogus Measurements

My expensive shoes have measurements but it doesn’t matter, all I want to know is will they fit. My expensive new suit has measurements but it doesn’t matter, all I want to know is will my expensive new shoes match.

The people being misled by measruements aren’t being led my manufacturers, they are being misled by reviewers. Idiotic rankings of digital gear based on measurements outside the range of human hearing. Cancelling entire brands who put out features customers actually want as they sell to humans, not bats. The worst of these websites will rant about their own superior $$$ equipment but mot even one person will ever use speakers in a klippel matchine, they actually put them in a room! The horror. The cancelling of brands, the talking down to the customers, is bogus.

You need to measure what matters! Are the customers actually happy? Is the warranty honored? Most importantly is their an in home audition period?
I don’t need someone to tell me if I could or should like a product. My room is not a test bench, or a klippel machine. Who cares what the component measures by itself because unless its a clock radio I’ll never use it by itself, I have to interconnect it in a "system" with "high quality" cables, (as in all cables are not the same).

If you want to measure something measure how your personal system of curated components interact with your room. That’s it. The rest of the stuff you could forget because these days if a brand overpromises and under delivers they will be following a formula for losing money, an no company likes that.

kota1
kota1 OP
2,706 posts
 

If measurements don’t help us get the sound we’re after then we need different measurements.

I find the in room FR measurements helpful.

nobody can tell the difference in a blind test.

That’s why I find measurements bogus when they try and promote a product as superior based on a graph of some sort. My in room FR measures well because of my effort in making it that way, not because of my DAC’s measurements, or whatever.

They attack the test

This paper on interconnect pathway measurements was published on AES

The author has spoken at over 100 topics and has received numerous awards.

The contradiction to the agenda of the lowlifes publishing bogus measurements sent them straight into a meltdown. Instead of publishing something themselves in AES with facts they simply attacked the test and the author.

The author has a link to reply to these attacks at the top of this paper.

 

Post removed 
kota1 OP
2,706 posts
 

@clearthinker

You want to support websites or people that publish measurements that have nothing to do with SQ I guess that is up to you. If you want to attack me for calling them out frequently and loudly thats OK. I posted links to support my claims that measurements are bogus. If you like bogus, again, I think that’s up to you.

Now, if you want to make a point about some type of universal measurement regarding how to determine sound quality go for it. You have problems with "clearthinking" if you can’t.

Post removed 
andy2
1,555 posts
 

Traditional audio measurement approaches are based in the frequency domain, using FFT technology and the steady state test tones it relies on. Acuity, with their complex signal processing background looked straight at the time domain, the area which is most revealing when it comes to the systems they normally work with.

I've been saying it all along.  You have test it in time domain.  The frequency domain in steady state response will not tell you much.  But even then, you have to listen at the end of the day.

More to discover