Why HiFi Gear Measurements Are Misleading (yes ASR talking to you…)

@tsacremento 

From reading through many test results on the ASR website, it appears to me that achieving ultra-low SINAD performance is almost trivial for good line-level electronics, but not so much for power amps. Am I not interpreting the test results correctly, or is this true? If true, is this issue due to the amount of gain required?

As a general rule, it is easier to achieve great performance where heat, and large amount of current and voltage is not involved.  Fortunately, amplifiers are finally catching up.  High-performance class D and a few class AB amplifiers have come very close to performance of state of the art DACs and achieved assured transparency.   Look at the vanishingly low distortion in this new Hypex amplifier:

And that is at 5 watts.  Increase the power output and SNR shoots way up with it:

There is a premium for this level of performance but nothing remotely like what high-end companies charge for far lower performance.

@prof I think we may have very different view on how science works, If something cant be 'scientifically' proven and yet, 'existst' (at least by testimonials of so many) than perhaps 'the scinece' (or better the people who claim that they are 'scientists') should try to find new methods or tools to examine those 'events'.

And, yet, 'your camp' (as A.would say) chooses the easy road by calling those claims as non existant. Imagine if you go to see the doctor about some pain you are experiencing and that he sends (even ig he did some tests) you home and tells you that that is only your imagination. Would you have trust in such 'scienece'?

By the way, the Asr did not invent nothing new. Long before them, there were many people who claimed that wires in general are not important. Than, what about power cables? Even today there are lots of people who claim that is scientifically impossible that they can affect the sound. I belive them. Its just that they do not know. Somebody else obvioulsly does know how to do it. Me, no...but I can recognise what it does in my system...despite or because my very consistent bias

As for the 'audiophiles' who are following Asr...or even others who have different perspective...I would suggest to anyone to follow only his 'taste' and his opinion. It is always nice to hear different thoughts and experiences and sometimes we can use other people advices, but at the end we are making the hi fi system for ourselfs, by our own standars, references, conditions and possibilities.

Finally, it would never cross my mind to login on Asr forum and than try to 'explain' them how I think that they are wrong...unlike some of them do....but, than, it must be becuse 'science' is on their side? Where did I hear something like that before?

@cleeds 

More ad hominem, appeal to authority, and bandwagon fallacies  from a measurementalist. As for the "chasing ferries" remark - you’re getting more and more colorful. Perhaps science is not your calling.

I am not a scientist.  I follow science.  You disdain the profession.  What do you expect to be called? 

And I am not a measurementalist.  I am all about what I can prove, not what I can fantasize that can easily be disproven.  Measurements are repeatable and provide valuable insight.  Why else would you hate them?  You must feel the mist of audio science brushing against your face.

As I keep saying, and evidenced by numerous reviews, I perform far more listening tests than all of you do, combined.  But I do so in ways that are defensible, not catering to marketing claims of companies and acting like their PR agencies as you are.

Really, in just about every post I provide evidence.  Do you just believe in power of words to overcome facts?

@alexatpos 

Sorry, but these are all great news. First, you have listened something, than, there are differences, and most important, the cheapest cable was the ’best’. Does it mean that we all should buy generic cables?

You should but not because of my listening tests.  Because we as engineers and people who understand how audio products work, and decades of research into what kind of listening test is valid and what is not, point to generic cables performing their function way beyond call of duty.

Think about it.  The cable is most harmless item in your audio gear.  A power cable has bandwidth way, way beyond what it needs to convey mains power.  It has no distortion of its own.  It is as pure as it can get relative to your electronics and transducers.  Yet folks focus on them and spend thousands of dollars on them.  Why?  Simple: they don't know how to perform an unbiased audio listening test.  I showed you how folks testing Pianos do that.  Talent shows routinely use blind testing.  So do people who test foods.  Do they all belong to a cult?  Really?

So no, don't go wasting money on premium cables because you think they sound better.  My testing actually shows in some cases that their cables are actually worse when it comes to noise!  Fortunately we are all too deaf to hear those artifacts but we can prove that company claims are just wrong.

@alexatpos 

@prof I think we may have very different view on how science works, If something cant be 'scientifically' proven and yet, 'existst' (at least by testimonials of so many) than perhaps 'the scinece' (or better the people who claim that they are 'scientists') should try to find new methods or tools to examine those 'events'.

If you say aliens land in your backyard every night, you don't get to claim that we need better radars to detect their arrival.  You need to first prove what you claim to be there, really is.  Science has provided that mechanism for that.  It is called controlled testing where the only variable is sound.  You involve many other factors and senses and then ask that science go and prove based on sound alone, that what you heard is real?  You have to be joking.

There is currently no research going on to validate what you all claim to hear.  None.  Why?  Because you have not provided any evidence of something real.  Do that and science will happily investigate.  Stick to your biased testing and we know why you arrive and wrong conclusions.  We don't need to advance the science any more.  We have known for decades that people say they hear things sighted that vanish when tested blind.  And that is that.

Put more directly, you need to advance your testing methods.  Science is years and years ahead of you.  To the extent you have no use for such science, then science doesn't owe you more work.  It certainly doesn't need to spend money chasing people's imagined effects.