The measurements aren't the problem with ASR. the problem is the mob of people that pounce anyone that says "hey this is better even though it measures poorer"
Exactly.
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.
- ...
- 212 posts total
Agreed. The point is not that "we should adopt the ASR Method." but rather we should avoid a false dilemma fallacy. Which both sides commit.
My point is that people just being "against ASR and FOR listening" are throwing out some valuable data. I already made this point at length so I’m going to stop after this. I'll add one more point -- people who focus on "how gear sounds rather than measures" frequently do not mention the rather complex effects of (a) other gear, (b) the recording, (c) the ROOM, and (d) their methods for listening. There is a very bad pseudo-science air in these conversations where it is supposed that the writer is conveying something that others would experience, but without any of the critical variables to help others know whether the claim would be something they can experience. How often do we hear "these speakers sound bright" and then we ask for a photo and find out they are listening with a bank of windows or a tile floor? It's this kind of thing that drives people to measurements even though those can be misleading or besides the point, too, but in a different way. |
@hilde45 valid point. Measurements are for showing what's measured (duh). This can be invaluable when trying to match equipment to the room. But yes, at the end of the day, our ears have to like the results. I'm happy ASR exists for the purpose of looking at the objective measurements. I'm unhappy that they are most likely steering newer audiophiles down the measurement rabbit hole, when they don't even have a clue yet what type of speakers and equipment they personally enjoy. |
True, but... on ASR, a good DAC costs $200 whereas on Audiogon you might be made to feel like an ignorant peasant if you haven’t "invested" $1000 in a USB cable. Then folks wonder why younger people are flocking to ASR |
I think it has more to do with reinforcing what some hope to be true. Exposing the virtues of a $ 1000 USB cable isnt the same as making a person feeling foolish for not buying one. On a personal note, my brother an engineer, bought both Topping mono amps and the $ 350.00 Topping DAC and sent both back within the return period. The DAC fared better than the amps, but neither were very good.
|
- 212 posts total