Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

You answer is upside down again...

That is not what we do with the tool. The tool gives you data. A human interprets it against psychoacoustics research which is based on listening.

And what is the alternative? Not measuring? Then how do you know your listening tests are accurate? Just because you say so?

You are so lost you did not even understand my point... But i cannot rival Dr. Van Maanen explanation..

I will take your hand ,Read me: measures in INNOVATIVE amplifier design are GUIDED by the designer EARS and psycho-acoustic fact to realize more musical design ... As Van Maanen do... And the point is that the use of Fourier method ,in electronic design and with this specific measuring tools, had a psycho-acoustic cost , the Fourier tools are linear and time-independant... Human hearings and musical sense come from non linear ears structure and non linear reading in the TIME-dependant domain...

Then if in the way we design our amplifier we dont take these facts into account, then our amplifier will not sound "musical"... It is why many piece of gear you measured perfect can sound non-musical at all for many listeners ... Amir you SERVE YOUR TOOL , the goal is that the tool must serve the designer... But you DEBUNK with your tools, you dont DESIGN amplifier, as Van Maanen did... It is the reason why yourself with more, way more deeper experience than me in audio, you dont understand this basic psycho-acoustic facts...and you read anything UPSIDE DOWN...

I learned it myself thanks to you, because i reacted to your arrogant dismissal of human hearings as FIRST RULER in audio, instead you put the MEASURING FOURIER TOOL as first ruler .... It is the reverse for a designer, knowing that the ears/brain use non linear time dependant methods the measures are used IN THE DESIGNING PROCESS ITSELF to serve better the pleasure of the human hearings not to be on the optimal spot of the measuring dials or graphs for some debunking work ...

Do you catch where you are lost and why ? Van Maanen will teach you the technicalities... Myself i am not in your field and you cannot take me seriously... Except if you read Van Maanen and the meaning of Oppenheim and Magnasco experiments...

Thanks for your patience with me...

Today's measurement tools, as advanced as they may be, often fail to fully capture the subjective listening experience. In my view, the most reliable way to evaluate audio equipment is through actual listening. While ASR and its measurements can be interesting and entertaining, I consider them more of a pastime when I have the time to spare. Ultimately, our own ears and personal experiences hold the key to determining what sounds good to us. So, while measurements have their place, I prioritize the subjective listening experience as the ultimate judge of audio quality.

@rowlocktrysail fully agree. I love objectively good audio equipment. It’s a bit like ice cream. Yeah I can measure the ingredients and ratios to know it’s ice cream and not yogurt but some taste better than the others. The study of the mind is still indeed science but it’s not as exacting as say electrical engineering. And yes speakers are electric signals into acoustic ones but we measure ultimately what’s good via a subjective device. 

amir_asr

"Nothing you quoted says those DACs measure the same. "
Amir, you clearly either do not read what is posted by your members or you are seriously deluded.
I am done with you. You do not answer many questions and when you do you twist your answers to suit yourself. I do not wish anyone ill, but I can say it is a good thing that so many realise your site is a joke and that the number is increasing. Please do not spread the furphy that you are doing people a service by running it.

@laoman the level of gaslighting is monumental.