Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

What is your fear of posting measurements

Hopelessly biasing you like your reviews.

Since a garage show operation can't have better measurements (from your limited understanding) , have no fear.

and results of controlled tests?  Do they not exist?  Are they not flattering?  

Stay tuned for a Youtube vid after PAF 2024

"Why?" You haven’t covered the "what." You said people shouldn’t use measurements to assess fidelity of amplifiers.

Why putting in my mouth what i never said... You are in complete lack of arguments about my main point in hearing theory ?

I never said that measures dont matter, i said measures cannot replace listening , nor in evaluation nor in design process...

 

I showed you that your own expert witness in two occasions used tones and measurements. And that the disconnected sine waves in his paper has zero resemblance to any music. How come he can do it but you complain about me?

Another distortion of what i said and of what Van Maanen said...You repeat that without being able to refute my point about hearing theories are you too frustrated?

ANY DESIGNER USE SINE WAVE PULSE ...Van Maanen too... But he use also real music bursts ... Is it too much difficult to understand why he use the two?

You are so frustrated you invented contradictions which had no relation with hearing theories and Fourier methods and the qualitative aspects of hearings .. ... Anybody can read Van Maanen articles ...

Really, it is the holy grail audiophile claim that "something that measures bad sounds good." As to shout "science doesn’t matter."

Another falsities you put in my mouth ... Are you just a marketer now or have you retain some scientific biases ?

Are you speaking to ME or to a crowd?

I spoke ONLY about science here, Magnasco and Oppenheim and Van Maanen are scientists not marketers, and Gibson is a science genius in the psychology of the visual field..

Then why speaking to ME : "science does not matter" as if i was the most idiotic here...

I NEVER said that "something that measure bad will sound good"...This is the opposite of your claim about measure... what i wrote and try to demonstrate is that because hearing cannot be explained by Fourier method which are used for the best in material design , trained listenings is always necessary as evaluation and in the design process , as was necessary to implement in the design process the right Fourier conditions to be able to predict a well behave working by each designed parts...

In a word good measures are not LINEARLY linked to good sounds.. And bad measures are not linearly linked to bad sounds... Why ? because no set of measures is COMPLETE and perfect concerning all aspests of design ... And because we dont understand completely the relation between our tools and hearing...

You miss that essential part in Van Maanen articles ?

 

I actually think it is possible to show pathological cases where the above is true but folks are not even trying. So trusting they are that people will just believe the salesman/engineer and give them the ticket to produce less peformant amplifiers while charging so much more for them! It is such inverted logic and remarkable that it works with people.

Fortunately this is changing. We are making that change. We are taking some control of our destiny and driving toward proper, transparent audio gear that can be shown to be so.

 

Sorry but you spoke as a seller yourself more and more it seems ... You market your own methodology as truth...You did not bother to answer my hearing theory explanations which are a refutation of your HUBRIS and claims that your idea of "transparency" is all there is in audio listening evaluation  and all come from your  limited set of measures... Your listening test and blind test are there only to debunk any opposition..

But the evaluation by listening is necessary even for parts and complete systems... And a sine wave trhough an audio system dont tell all the story there is to tell to the ears... Music matter...

i will not wait for future answers... You never adressed my objections and anybody can read them and see for himsdelf that you are unable to contradict my points..And now you did not speak to me personnally but you speak for an IMAGINARY crowd ...

i learned a lot trying to explain these things to you...

But when you explain to someone a truth that contradict his way of living, nothing will convince him... i like to discuss too much😊... I miss my students after my retirement ... But it is no more possible to go further, you cannot and dont want to understand... For you Van Maanen is a seller and Oppenheim and Magnasco experiment is a mere  anecdote... You are not interested in hearings theory, you play with toys...

 

Thanks for the discussion ..

my best to you...

 

Hopelessly biasing you like your reviews.

Since a garage show operation can't have better measurements (from your limited understanding) , have no fear.

Now measurements of speakers are not useful because they bias people?  Which way?  They make people think they are bad?

@mahgister 

ANY DEESIGNER USE SINE WAVE PULSE ...Van Maanen too... But he use also  real music busts ... Is it too much difficult to understand why ?

There is nothing there to understand.  You have no information on what music was used.  How the testing was done. Who were the listeners.  What was compared to what.  You are asking me to believe in something that even you don't know about.

@soundfield you look silly. You call out @amir_asr and then don’t answer. smh