@analog_aficionado Outstanding post (the long one). Helps very much to understand and reconcile the differences between ASR results & listening. Thanks!
I am in the camp that says ASR is a single source of information just like every other review.
The Audio Science Review (ASR) approach to reviewing wines.
Imagine doing a wine review as follows - samples of wines are assessed by a reviewer who measures multiple variables including light transmission, specific gravity, residual sugar, salinity, boiling point etc. These tests are repeated while playing test tones through the samples at different frequencies.
The results are compiled and the winner selected based on those measurements and the reviewer concludes that the other wines can't possibly be as good based on their measured results.
At no point does the reviewer assess the bouquet of the wine nor taste it. He relies on the science of measured results and not the decidedly unscientific subjective experience of smell and taste.
That is the ASR approach to audio - drinking Kool Aid, not wine.
@analog_aficionado Outstanding post (the long one). Helps very much to understand and reconcile the differences between ASR results & listening. Thanks! I am in the camp that says ASR is a single source of information just like every other review. |
measurements are critical to audio, but a 100 grams of german chocolate measures the same 100g as 100g of dog crap. they dont taste the same. |
"Measurements" is too crude a word. @prof was pointing at this issue and this comment ignores it. Some measurements are, say, 2nd harmonic distortions -- those may upset some at ASR, but the rest of us understand that those measurements are NOT aligned with "bad sound" as some of us experience that. (Others here do NOT like that 2nd harmonic. So, this varies.) But other measurements are of a kind that correlates to what we would ALL agree are responsible for a bad-sounding product. Some of us here applaud ASR and others for measuring things which DO correlate with "bad sound." As @prof put it:
Of course, there are issues with how ASR folks do things, as @analog_aficionado points out:
It’s a complex debate. My main issue is how people simplify the issues too much. Maybe people like to remain vague on what a "measurement" is because they like to "take a stand" against so-called "objectivists" or "measurementalists." But that is not playing fair with language and the result is to perpetuate misunderstanding. Finally, I am certain that @audio_aficinado nails it with this comment:
I had a long and bitter debate with Ethan Winer about this. My position is that there may be things heard which cannot be measured because the brain and perception are way WAY beyond our understanding at this point in our scientific understanding. His reply to that was, essentially, "No, it’s just placebo effect and subjective bias." (In other words, y’all are just in denial.) He could be right about that claim, but he has no basis for making it, and we’re just back in the realm of rhetoric, not argument. |
Anyone who bases their buying decisions on the results of a single review or site is extremely misguided. ASR provides just one data point out of the myriad of data points available. They provide accurate measurements (as far as I can tell) and an opinion. Listening is an optional part of their approach. In conjunction with all of the other information available about a product ASR is just another tool and provides useful information. No one is forcing anyone to do anything here, it is YOU that decide how to treat the information you find.
|