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.
@oberoniaomnia You want burden of proof? Ok I will give you burden of proof. Go measure the capacitance and inductance of cables, they can vary greatly. Low inductance has a sound profile. High inductance has a sound profile. Low/high capacitance each has a different sound. Of course there are many other things that also affect the sound of a cable, but this is enough for the burden of proof. |
@richardbrand |
@samureyex |
While I wouldn’t characterize myself as “ an ASR supporter”, I do think ASR has provided valuable insight in several areas. 1) DACs - Providing consistent measurements for every DAC they test is helpful, though as others have suggested, these are useful data points that are certainly not exhaustive with respect to how DACs actually sound. 2) Power conditioning products - As I mentioned previously, this is an area of the industry where I believe there is a fair amount of misinformation and even fraud. So I think some of the work ASR has done here has helped prevent some audiophiles from spending money on products that may have no - or even negative - effects on the sound of their systems. 3) Network switches - Same as power conditioning products, only more.
|
