Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews

I think you measured using a single frequency at steady state response at one 1KHz. 

That would be wrong.  Here is a full frequency sweep of the P12 Powerplant:

 

Full frequency sweep is performed from 20 Hz to 20 KHz.

 It might not reveal the affectiveness or deficiencess of the power plant.  

Seeing how the above measurement showed that the P12 increased noise instead of decrease it, I say your assessment is incorrect.

A better test would be using a square wave input then look at how the output follows the input square wave with different load - using high current and low current load. This would be a more difficult test than steady state.

That is still "steady state" by your definition since there is no discontinuity in the signal.  That aside, you can't have square wave as a valid audio signal since it has infinite bandwidth (Fourier Theorem).

Also make sure the partner amp that you’re using for the test is not the limiting factor. An outlaw amp probably is not really a good candidate. You probably need a better amp.

The amp was not the limiting factor if you read the review of PS Audio P12 Part 2:

Here is the amp by itself, with continuous power and burst:

 

Now see how power lowered while using the P12:

 

Both burst and continuous power reduced.  This was easily explained due to use of current limiting in P12, contrary to company marketing and understanding of their CEO and founder.

We can see this in power sweep as well:

I think the flaw of most of your testing is because they are done in the frequency domain.

Your thinking is wrong.  All testing is done in time domain.  The graphs are shown in frequency domain since it is hard for a human to tease out the noise and distortion from a waveform display in time domain.  Keep in mind again that based on Fourier Theorem, time and frequency domain are interchangeable.  

Frequency domain also has a major advantage in that much of our psychoacoustic knowledge is in frequency domain due to how our ear works with a bank of auditory filters.

Bottom line is that P12 is not a true power regenerator and has current limiting which reduces performance of amplifiers.  Testing clearly showed this.  With non-amplifiers, it simply did nothing useful since those products have their own internal filtering and run on DC, not AC.

Note that company doesn't provide any of the measurements I provided.  Had they done this type of testing, they would have a) seen the degradations P12 introduces and b) realized it makes no difference to output of audio products.

Amir calls himself a professional listener. He sets up "one" Magnepan LRS panel and calls that his listening experiences for the common audience. 

Pretty absurd, isn't it?  Even more absurd is you go to your doctor wondering if you have broken your arm.  He turns on this machine that outputs invisible rays.  Yet he claims he can get a picture out of that showing your arm is broken!!!  They must create these X-ray pictures in photoshop!

Not everything in audio needs to make lay sense to you.  Same as X-ray being able to go through your body and show your bones.  You trust your doctor to know that X-ray can show you that information.  You should trust people who have research single-speaker vs stereo vs multi-channel and found that single speaker is far more revealing of speaker flaws than when you add more channels.

I have a video on that:

 

My job as a reviewer is to give you accurate assessments of products and single speaker is a critical component of that.  Use stereo for enjoyment but if you are evaluating speaker performance, do it with a single one.

Read the Yamaha white papers and dump the Harman curve. The button pushing, chart generating Harman sinad moron seems to think he understands music better than the guys who made all your musical instruments.

By that notion, those engineers should be creating your music as well.  After all, they know more about those instruments than any musician!  

We trust Harman because they don't make lay claims like that.  They perform controlled studies across different sets of populations.  That testing instructs us what is likely to sound good to majority of people. 

My Kawai digital piano sounds like crap due to poor sound system.  The fact that they create great acoustic pianos didn't at all enable them to produce an electronic one.

To wit, this is the performance of a clone of Yamaha NS-10M one of the most famous monitoring speakers of its era:

This is a highly colored and bright speaker.  No way you want to use this speaker for any use, playback or music creation.  Clearly no one recorded one of their Pianos and then played it back on this speaker and said they sounded the same.

This is what a proper monitoring speaker looks like (the Neumann KH120II):

 

Clearly building musical instruments it not a requirement for building proper speaker.

So please stop appealing to authority this way.  We know how to measure speakers and determine what is or is not a good product.  If a company knows what they are doing, it would be reflected here.  Not in some lay argument as you put forward.

Your thinking is wrong. All testing is done in time domain. The graphs are shown in frequency domain since it is hard for a human to tease out the noise and distortion from a waveform display in time domain. Keep in mind again that based on Fourier Theorem, time and frequency domain are interchangeable.

 

 

What are the REAL value of your information if the ears/brain do not work in the linear frequency/time domain of Fourier maps but in his own non linear time domain and recognise and decode what it was trained for by evolution for millenia and personal history of each one of us (QUALIA in speech and music and spatial attributes of sound)?

As it is proven already by acoustics research...And i already gives many articles about that...

Nothing can replace hearing ...

You put at the core of S.Q. analysis a peripheral set of tool at best...

But it is useless to discuss because what i say put your measuring set stance as a secondary tool unable to replace listening at all..

Then it is impossible for you to recognize truth here...It is the cost you must pay for promotion of your tools.

We must evaluate a piece of gear in a specific system for a specific room and by specific ears/brain.

His verified specs are in spite of their importance only secondary data relative to psychoacoustics parameters and system parameters in the room in the REAL evaluation and cannot replace it.

You sell as science about S.Q. a set of measures which so useful it could be are not the truth about S.Q.

It is an ideology.

😊

I bought the Fosi SK1 headphone ampli/preamp not because it measured well in your review but because you want to keep it for your headphone.

If you had not said so about your subjective experience i would never had bought it only because of good specs... It is not enough...

 

 

@amir_asr
"My job as a reviewer is to give you accurate assessments of products and single speaker is a critical component of that.  Use stereo for enjoyment but if you are evaluating speaker performance, do it with a single one."
You appear to know as much about what you are posting as the man in the moon.
You DO NOT give accurate assessments of products else you would assess the quality of the workmanship, and as we can all see, Topping's quality control is crap.You never mention this of course.

Secondly only a half wit assesses speakers by testing only one. Spakers are listened to in pairs.

Thirdly you are a hypocrite - you throw people off your own site for expressing contrary opinions yet come here and bleat your opinions like a goat.