Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

@amir_asr There is another variable that I do question when it comes to measuring gear, and it is this...is this measuring gear not somehow calibrated to someone’s hearing and expectation of what sounds to them...correct? If we believe ( and I have no idea if you do) that all appreciation of SQ is subjective; IOW one person’s appreciation of the sound of a stand up bass is another’s definition of a cello, then we have to come to the conclusion that what sounds great to one, is not necessarily the case to another.

A further reason I have no interest in WBF, is because the site turned into a horn speaker lover’s fest, and to me horn speakers are hopelessly colored and generally annoying to listen to. ( and I have listened to numerous models). To others, this design is the ultimate in SQ. Music, at least IMO, is something that appeals to a variety of tastes; RAP for instance has its fervent followers, and its haters. Everyone has their preferences, and so how do measurements account for this??

Amir methods of measures CAN ONLY VERIFY GEAR SPECS as publised by the company and infirm it or confirm it... THATS ALL...

Specs? What specs. Some of you gone so blind on asking for proof points that manufacturers feel like they shouldn’t give you anything. Have you seen the type of measurements I have been posting on any gear you bought? You have not.

So no, I wish I was just verifying things. Instead, I am having to do the work that the company should have done when designing said gear. Because if they had, they would have seen the many awful sins that they could have fixed which have nothing but negative impact on fidelity of equipment.

And you are helping them in this regard by constantly saying measurements are not important, etc. Don’t let them off the hook. We have a speaker salesman here who doesn’t even post measurements for speakers! How bad can we get? Do you really think you learn nothing from frequency response of a speaker? That it can’t tell you how good or bad it is at faithfully producing a neutral sound that is true to the recording? Check this example of the Klipsch RP600M speaker:

Look at that massive dip at 2 kHz. You don’t think this measurement is massively important to know about? If we had held up every speaker company to post measurements like this, I am pretty sure they would not have marketed this speaker. As it is, it took measurements like mine to get them to fix this in version 2 (I have not confirmed).

So no, I am not just verifying specs. I am giving you a picture of how well engineered and correct the design and execution of an audio product is. I shouldn’t have to but you all as consumer, and laxed press, have allowed it to get this bad.

I am doing my part to reverse this trend. Some companies have woken up and are starting to do the right thing by posting measurements like I do. These are the companies you want to reward: the ones that don’t hide behind essays as a way to avoid giving you information you need to know how some equipment can perform.

amir_asr

... all the rest of what you are quoting is hoped to confuse the regular reader who doesn’t understand the topic, hoping to get you to forego proper proofs ...

This is just such nonsense, and made all the more so by the use of bold face for emphasis. Certainly, @mahgister isn’t trying to confuse the reader and isn’t obligated to provide anything to meet your definition of "proper proof."

This is a hobbyist’s website, not a scientific forum or, in the case of ASR, a quasi-pseudo-faux-scientific forum. At the very least, @mahgister has pretty good grip on logic, which is probably why his posts confound you so.

I don’t know why you keep bringing up Fourier transform. Most of my tests don’t involve any kind of fourier analysis. Take the dashboard I post earlier for that Carver amplifier:

See those THD+N and SINAD numbers? They are computed *without FFT*. The analyzer simply filters out the 1 kHz tone and what is left is noise+distortion. It then simply reports that sum energy of unwanted signal as a ratio to the test signal. No FFT is needed or used.

You dont get it anything right but always half truth...

I never say that your measure use FFT, i indicated that they are used in the usual theory context about hearings that the ears work linearly and mainly in the frequency domain, this is the inspired Fourier theory of hearing in the frequency domain ... It is falseby being INSUFFICIENT to describe human hearings  and DEMONSTRATED by Oppenheim and Magnasco...And Hans Van Maanen explain it COMPLETELY theoretically and for his own design ..¯Read it...

What you said about your OWN mesures is RIGHT in itself and you dont use FFT... But the Context in which your interpret what is "sound qualities" and what they MUST BE , is a theory of hearing that is falsified by psycho-acoustic experiments and by many audio amplifier designer...see above...

Fourier transforms then are an invaluable diagnostic tool to assess audibility because much of our knowledge of psychacoustics is in frequency domain, not time. In time domain, we are relative quite deaf. This is by design. When you listen to someone in your home, their voice gets bounced around the room, gets delayed (timing changes) plus attenuated and then mixes with the direct sound creating a "phase soup." So the notion that time matters is non-sequitur in most part.

You spoke like a used car sellers here... Where did i say that FFT is not invaluable in diagnostic ? Did i say that Fourier was an idiot ? I said that ONLY using it in the context of an audio theory of hearings based on linear and time dependant domain is TOO NARROW and direct us to false conclusions about audio qualities as human hearings recognize them...Musician for example speaking about timbre perception and picking each multiple timbres of instruments in orchestral recordings or playins etc...

And here again you spew half truth : The bouncing of waves in a small room can create a " soup" yes,but you FORGET to mention that the difference between a "perceived soup" and a balanced ratio ASW/LV in a specific room of precise dimensions is in the PRECISE TIMING and duration.... Reverberation is not always a negative phenomenon... If the timing is not right yes it will be a soup... But all acoustic art is in the TIMING AMOUNT... I know because i created my room...

Certainly, @mahgister isn’t trying to confuse the reader and isn’t obligated to provide anything to meet your definition of "proper proof."

I was talking about the author of said papers, not him.  But go ahead and summarize what you think @mahgister has been quoting and what it means.

This is a hobbyist’s website, not a scientific forum or, in the case of ASR, a quasi-pseudo-faux-scientific forum. At the very least, @mahgister has pretty good grip on logic, which is probably why his posts confound you so.

He doesn't confound me in the least.  Unlike any of you, I have been interacting and answering what he is posting.  For your part, I am pretty sure you can't even summarize let alone defend what he is posting.  But go ahead: show the respect to him and tell me in your words what he is advocating.