Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

@mahgister +1

@amir_asr You have not considered in my example the fact that all who heard this speaker found it to be the best that they had ever heard. Is this possible in real life, I believe it is, as we have examples of gear that sounds great and yet measures poorly. (For example, a number of low powered single ended tube amps).

In my example, i would state that the measuring devices are simply measuring the wrong things, and not that the speaker is in fact inherently flawed. Your reply tells us this ( the opposite)-- you believe the measuring devices are in fact perfect, and that the audiences’ hearing is in fact flawed. This is why I think there are other members here who are taking you to task, they do not have the same absolute belief in the results that your measuring devices deliver to always correlate to the sound that gear produces.

One thing I do agree with you about--100%, and it is this, IF everyone hears a piece of gear that sounds poor to their ears, and also measures poorly, then it is a service to disclose this aspect to the a’phile community. Folks still need to hear the piece for themselves before making a purchase decision, but the fact that it performs poorly and yet is touted by the manufacturer/dealer can be possibly explained by its poor technical design. ( which is again why i believe that the measurements JA performs for Stereophile have definite value).

You say this to me till the first day...

English is not my first language ...

Perhaps you must SPOKE and DISCUSS the truth and depth of the psycho-acoustic points and articles i submitted , instead of repeating that my posts are too long for 2 years now... No more longer than Amir posts here by the way...

And remind this, i am not here to win a popularity contest about my posts..

@mahgister YOU were the one complaining that you posted something 4 times and didn't get a response. You seemed confused as to why you seem to be lecturing in a void. (And who cares what your first language is? The content goes on and on and on. I can write more briefly in non-native languages. It's not hard.) Clearly, you're too sensitive for constructive criticism. Forget it. I will just scroll past your 1000 word posts. 

@amir_asr 

In sharp contrast, no one knows the tonality of anything produced in creation of music.  That brightness in music may be part of it, or may be your speaker.  You don't know.

...

There is some hope here.  As long as we all rally around neutral speakers, then we can reduce the level of confusion and lack of consistency.  This is slowly happening as even low cost speakers are striving for this now. 

In a nutshell, that's why the work done by yourself and others of a similar persuasion is absolutely vital to the future wellbeing of the whole audio industry.

At some point we may want to finally get off the 'upgrade' roundabout and settle down to just enjoying music without the constant nagging feeling that there might be something better out there.

Your work and the subsequent presentation of data in determining the genuinely better from the merely different can help us make that decision.

You should be proud of the difference you have already made inside a comparatively short time.

Please keep up the good work and perhaps consider working alongside manufacturers. I know some of them are actually happy to discuss your findings and may even use them as feedback for their own R&D.

In any case there must still be hundreds of loudspeakers that have yet to be put under the Klippel NFS.

Sadly, many high-end speakers go their own way with at times abominable tonality.

I doubt there's a single person here who has not heard an example of this for themselves. Some of the most expensive loudspeakers at shows are often the most difficult to listen to.

I don't think it's usually deliberate either. It's probably one person's individual idea of what makes a great speaker and unfortunately after all of that hard work and dedication no one was able to tell them any different.

Amir did not read neither  Oppenheim and Magnasco, nor Hans Van Maanen...

Anyway he cannot read them because if he did, all his opinions about the way we listen , and the way an amplifier must be designed to sound musically will be crushes to pieces...

Psycho-acoustic science is not technology and debunking is not designing ...And Dogma about the way ALL audiophiles listening are deluded is only that a dogma created on a false theory of psycho-acoustic based on Fourier tools which are linear and not in the time domain unidirectional way of the human ears...Fourier tools are useful in amplifier cdesign for example but the designer to design well must know about the way the human ears work in the Non linear time dependant domain...

By the way for sure the time domain exist in the Fourier method BUT  THE RELATION BETWEEN THE FREQUENCIES DOMAIN AND THE TIME DOMAIN ARE LINEAR... Do you catch ?

I will not go further... Amir will never debate in details the articles i used because his perspective will be destructed... ANYBODY WITH A BRAIN CAN READ THEM...

Again so useful his falsification about the gear marker can be and are welcome, his bashing of the way humans hears and listen, for the prevalence of his TOOL ANALYSIS as prescription is false and wrong..

Dont belive me, compare what Amir said with Magnasco and Oppenheim and with the articles of Hans Van Maanen...There are not into techno babble , they are physicists...