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.

toronto416

While on the topic of the best measured dac ever. Benchmark designer made the Benchmark Dac 1 and for years he insisted it’s the best dac. It cannot be improved further.

But people did not like the Dac 1. Some years later, the Dac 2 was released.

 

Been there, done that. Had DAC3B. One of the least engaging DACs I’ve owned. My prior two dacs and subsequent two dacs after the Benchmark DAC3B all measured worse, and they all sounded more engaging, more fun to listen to. What’s being measured and what is being suppressed and filtered out does not always correlate for me in translation to good sound,

petaluman:

I am aware the small list of speakers I mentioned are "box" designs (stretching the definition for the Genelecs and the Dutch&Dutch) and am well aware of the several categories of speakers that are not of a box design. My comment was specific to Amir's own "reference" speaker--his Revels, and my general observation of the preferences of commenters on the ASR site appear to be. I do not believe I wrote anything to suggest I was unaware of the alternatives to box design speakers, planars, planar-hybrid, horn, horn-hybrid, open baffle, never mind the variants of box designs, transmission line, or for that matter transducer variations with ribbon tweeters, long-stroke woofers, field coil transducers, too many to list.The ASR site seems to sample whatever the readership sends for testing, and most appear to be monitor-size boxes, which is to be expected at those dominate the market. Occasionally a product from an audiophile brand is sent in only to be tested and found wanting, which then excites contentious responses.

I am sure if you were willing to ship Amir a pair of Magnepans for testing, he would oblige.

If you ship a non-traditional item to ASR for review, no matter how good. Amir will absolutely destroy that product in his measurements. This I can guarantee you.

He absolutely obliterated, massacred the Chord Dave he reviewed. There is no shortage of great and beloved products that he had destroyed with his reviews. But strangely no products he endorsed are beloved.

I read ASR, but don't agree with the attitude that measurements are all you need.  My biggest problem are the members who can ONLY see the audio world through their own narrow vision.  Every time someone seeks advice, it's the same routine of "it doesn't matter," rather than having any REAL input/advice.

What I DO value it for is the measurements (sans "recommendations") because MANY internet reviews these days ONLY speak about sound with no hard measurements - the exact opposite - and where I do believe sound is the ultimate arbiter, I feel modern equipment should at least measure reasonably.