I don't think measurements are everything, but I find that objective, repeatable, measurements provide a common starting point for a conversation on any given audio topic. So, yes, would love to hear you dive into the topic further.
Such a broad, general body of information here to crack open. Gotta say, i'm excited! Perhaps a podcast with some subject matter experts on measurements, the process of fine tuning and all that lovely stuff. @@Audioholics that would be awesome. With the amount to discuss here... a multi-part (like the old bass management lectures of years past) might hold a mountain of value over time. Would love to see more of that stuff again if it's within your means.
@@Audioholics I know of another channel that does a great deal of objective measurements and I love them! But, the problem I find with that channel is that they do tons of objective measurements, but then give subjective opinions. In a review of two different speakers, they both objectively measured very similar. One product he loved, the other product he was trashing. But their objective measurements were very similar. Like, you could overlay the graph of each for each test and they weren't far off at all (And in fact, the product he was trashing, I think actually bested the product he was adoring in terms of objective measurements.) But it was his subjective analysis over the review that skewed so many of his cult like following people to believe one speaker was superior to the other. That same channel measures a great number of DACs, and that reviewer uses SINAD measurements to qualify his reviews. I think that's great! And that person is driving the industry to do better in design and implementation of their DAC's into their systems. He uses a scale of excellent, very good, fair and then poor, to categorize various DACs. But the fact is, SINAD/ Distortion levels/ etc, aren't really audible for humans unless it's -65 db or greater, and all but like 5 DACs, out of hundreds he has measured, fall into that non-audible range. So, what do those measurements he uses matter when it's his subjective editorializing that really pushes users to one product or the other and considering most of what he is measuring is still inaudible? In another case, I recently saw Danny from GR Reasearch, to his credit, decern 8/10 tests that were using his speaker cable vs. a super cheap cable. They went on to conclude that they wished they could actually measure what the different they were hearing, but instead, we just have to rely on what they hear. Which is absolute BS. In one test he was using a 10-gauge cable vs, I think, an 18-gauge cable, which are known to have absolute, different, measurements between inductance, resistance, and capacitance. So, I could actually see how objective measuring may explain that. (And Danny had to sit there listening to 5 seconds on repeat, over and over, and then quickly swap out the cables, but for years that guy has insisted that cables are "transformative" and "obvious" and "drastically improve sound quality". So why couldn't he just do a simple A/B - listen one time through - and conclude which was which cable? And finally, my nephew went off to college in August of last year and to my horror, I found out that he now has a Crosby turntable that he loves. He is getting into Vinyl and has made friends exchanging LP's with his dormmates. Do you think that kid minds one bit about the wow and flutter he gets with that turntable? (And before going further, when I found out he had a Crosby, I went online and bought him a new Fluance RT-85 TT that I'm breaking in / "testing" for him now. What any self-respecting audiophile uncle wouldn't?) But no, he just loves the music and the fact that he's listening to vinyl, to all sorts of new music, I love that more than i worry about the wow and flutter of his turntable. Measurements matter - but at the end of the day, we all have to remember it's about experiencing the music, IMO.
The measurements tell you a whole lot. Unfortunately, we have been conditioned to think that there are just one or two graphics that tell the whole picture. For example, people who are measurement adverse will often site measurements that show similar performance and then note that they don’t actually sound the same. Of course, that is true. But that is because the entire picture isn’t there. A single on axis frequency response does not tell you much about the speaker. You need more than that to really get a whole picture of what the speaker is going to do in your room and how it is going to sound. There needs to be a more thorough set as well as deeper understanding of measurements in order to draw meaningful conclusions. On the flipside, those who don’t understand this are the first ones to downplay the importance of good, thorough and accurate measurements. It’s pretty easy to see who understands what they are talking about and who doesn’t in regards to measurements and their importance.
Valid points, but you'd be surprised how often we've measured some warts on a speaker, and they turned out sounding better than expected and conversely, a textbook measuring speaker per CTA-2034 sounded like ass. I've had this discussion with Dan Roemer and plan to have him on our channel to discuss why that is.
What speaker had textbook 2034 data and sounded bad? There’s a lot to unpack there. I’m not surprised that there are speakers that have “warts“ that sound good. I’ve reviewed many of myself that fit that description. But I can also use the data to pinpoint the things I do like, and the things I don’t. Unfortunately, at the current time, they’re just isn’t enough knowledge on how to read the data by many but as we continue to publish data and discuss it, hopefully it will become easier and more prevalent. 👍
@@ErinsAudioCorner I'm trying to keep this brand agnostic, especially IF we bring on loudspeaker designers from competing brands. But I've noticed this on some horn loaded speakers. I think the horns were coloring the sound despite the graphs looked good. I sent you a PM.
Avid reader/watcher of both your channels/website and appreciate your views and accessibility!! I value measurements. It helps form a decision. But not everything. I want to know build quality, how well it takes to EQ (cause sorry, I'm not the "don't touch the tone controls!" guy when 99/100 people "flavor to taste"), feature set and how it performs, ergonomics, comparisons (price), and supportability. I tend to focus on linearity, compression, distortion and how speakers react to placement (toe in/out, near/far from wall, on axis/off axis in the vertical plane etc...) That's hard to show on a graph and thank you BOTH (Erin and James cause Gene hasn't been seen hoisting $20K S7ts on 10' platforms lol. Smart) for your incredibly valuable reviews. I know cutting verbose reviews down for readability takes time but I love details and each of you does a great job of not leaving much on the cutting room floor. Cheers!
Hi Gene. Thanks for soliciting your viewers/readers opinions about what information we would find most useful. Although I subscribed to Stereophile and TAS for a couple of decades, a few years ago I found I was spending less and less time reading their equipment reviews. Since I ran across Audioholics (sorry, but only 3-4 years ago) and other on-line magazines that provide objective measurements, I realized that what I was looking for, in addition to interesting, engaging presentation, was information about potential purchases that wasn't based only on the personal tastes and preferences of (usually) old guys I would never meet, never know, and with whom I shared nothing. To answer your implied question, what I would like to see more about is information on how specific measurements and features of a reviewed piece of equipment can or can be used to affect the listening/viewing experience when it's in use in an actual room. Audioholics, ASR and Erin all have dedicated videos on understanding measurements. (I just watched your series with Matt Poes on speaker directivity for second time, last night.) They are very informative, but when that information is separate from an actual review, it tends to be too abstract to easily digest. And attempts to use examples from previous reviews really require familiarity and interest in that previous review in order to be meaningful for us audience members. Thanks for this opportunity, and have a happy new year.
Hi Gene! I agree with you that measurements are not everything. But on the flip side, having measurements is better than "flying blind", or relying on some strangers's assessment on an equipment. There are THREE things that I learned from George Krampera of KV2 about audio: 1. SPL (ex. 100dB) 2. Frequency (ex. 20kHz) 3. Time (ex. 5ms) If we have measurements on these 3 factors, then you are MOSTLY there. For example: 1. SPL - Simply how loud can a speaker go before it's distorted. Want a more detailed picture about how distortion works on a speaker? Then bind SPL and Frequency data, you will then see at what frequency a speaker is distorting at what SPL. 2. Frequency - simply what frequency spectrum can be produced by a speaker. You want to see if a speaker has a good crossover design? Bind the Frequency data with Time data, this will result in something similar to CTA2034 where vertical directivity plot is affected by many drivers time domain properties intermingling with each other. 3. Time - want to see at a glance if a speaker's crossover is well designed or not? Watch the Step response graph and watch for break-up/discontinuity. Bad step response graph USUALLY indicates that there is a problem with the crossover, that will (most of the time) affect staging/imaging of the system, one way or the other. Want to see if a DAC has a pre-ringing filter, or some other filter in place? Watch for its impulse response. Want to see if a speaker driver has ringing on its drivers or cabinet? Bind the Frequency data with Time data in the form of Cumulative Spectral Decay graph and watch those waterfall plot falling away, and if we see a row of long ringing, we can see it, at what frequency and for how long. So are measurements everything? No of course, but with complete measurements data on these 3 aspects that I mentioned above, I can have a HIGHLY EDUCATED GUESS about the CHARACTERISTICS of a speaker system. Might not be 100% accurate, but it won't be too far from it either.
As far as speaker frequency response goes, a large dip or peak in the response is generally audible, but of course, won't tell you the whole story of how that speaker sounds.
@@jman8368 Indeed. Frequency response measurements only show a fraction of the "whole picture", that's why George Krampera always mentions "Time", "SPL", " Frequency" in measurements. You cannot separate those three and only see the frequency domain only and get "the picture". Our ears are sensitive to timing DIFFERENCE. Let's say that one speaker is 1ms "faster" than the other one (in a stereo setup), what you'll perceive is the "stage" is not "centered", that's it. 1ms difference is crucial. Now imagine that your speaker drivers are not "in time", and you set them up imprecisely (one speaker is further than the other resulting in a 1.3ms timing difference for example) what the staging would sound like? Add to that 1 speaker is closer to a wall causing comb filtering from the said wall that only occurs on one side of the speaker (the other speaker is far from the wall). But does this case make us reject measurements? I certainly will not simply because it is the interaction between the speaker and the room that caused the problem, not the speaker itself. It's a whole other problem.
The big picture only becomes clear with a product in your system at home. Measuring components doesn't necessarily describe their performance in a system. The system combinations are almost endless. In home trial offers clear things up. Great video.
Great review. For people that will read thi. Hopefully this message helps. Buy what you can afford and what sounds the best in yours ears. Measurements may tell you enough of the performance you may expect. Quality is on the parts used in conjunction with the rest of the build. It doesn't tell you everything. Remember every brand has a distinct sound and build technique. It also pends on what your measuring for. Knowing you, you go to great lengths to test everything possible. You do a great job.
What im getting from this is understanding which measurements apply to a persons situation is what really matters. I think a deeper dive into making those connections would help a lot of people.
Well said Gene! Measurements tell us some basics and some starting points. But we can measure VERY LITTLE of what we actually hear and experience. Keep up the great work!! LOVE IT.😊 😊 For example. How do we measure soundstage width? Depth? Height? Focus? In room projection, detail placement, transient ability, resolution, etc etc…..
How? By taking detailed measurements, listening to the speaker and correlating the two. Erin's audio corner does this well. Let's also not forget that the room is about 50% of the sound and integrates with the speaker to produce and influence the sound we hear.
@@paulgyro Erin does a great job at what he does. But, measurements still don't tell you everything or fully explain why I've had textbook good measuring speakers in my own rooms that sounded lifeless and sterile. Then there are speakers that don't measure as well but absolutely sound great in the same room with multiple trained listeners experiencing the same thing.
@@Audioholics sounds like a lack of dynamics. Devil's in the details here, we need more then on and off axis frequency for sure. We need to look at time domain, compression, distortion, ECT. Measurements aren't everything but I'd estimate they can get us 80-90% there with some long time speaker designers asserting we can measure everything that is important about a speaker.
@paulgyro I'm a big believer in the importance of dynamics as you would notice with most of my reference speakers having more cone area in the critical midrange that many companies seem to ignore even in their flagship products.
Gene, thanks. My two cents is that Product review in audio without measurements, is incomplete review and doesn’t allow make a quality conclusion about product objectively.
I think that it’s great that you guys are sorta ‘ reeling things in’. But not reeling things in from your own content but from other ‘ measurement ‘ forums which do not have objective interests in mind. It would be great to objectively put those differences into quantifiable measurements or variables. Great stuff
Just listen first and get the feel of the equipment. Make notes of what you hear, good and bad. And then do all sorts of measurements and see if you find issues that you heard earlier. Measuring first and then hearing might cause confirmational bias.
I've never seen a discussion on speaker measurements and what consumers should look out for when purchasing speakers, would be an interesting and helpful topic
I purchased a DAC from a small company that I will not name. It measured great, it sounded great. It died after 2 years because it's design was poor. For example, the power button is a surface mount component. Sometimes, a good product is the one that lasts, not the one with the flash.
Yes, please. Do a series of discussions on what and how much we can and can't tell baseed on measurements. My assumption at the moment would be: Each measurement will tell us, with sufficient precision, excactly what is measured, and nothing else. There's no single measurement that will tell us everything. Making a final judgement based on measurements would mean having all of them, and understanding all of them. Including proper measurements of the room in which the speakers will be used. Some measurements will give us a very good starting point for predicting real world performance. Say, Klippel dispersion for predicting in room response. But then rooms will vary, and any prediction of performance in "a room" will have a limited precision in predicting the performance in "your room". The remaining topics of interest (to me) are loudspeakers, rooms, and the interactions between them (including any DSP XO/ room correction). The battle on the electronics front is over as far as I'm concerned.
One of the things I took into consideration before buying my Marantz SR-8012 receiver was Gene's bench test. I looked at a balance of features, build quality, specs and what it was going to bring to my system. I have owned it for about 6 years now and it seems crazy that it has been since 2018 since I purchased this receiver.
YES! Please. The measurements only show so much. BUT HOW DOES IT SOUND! I have seen a lot of measurement reviews of speakers. Rating solely on the measurement. And then seen a lot of reviews of that say that speaker sounds horrible.
I lost count of how many times I've seen spec sheets and been impressed, to end up with a WTF moment and scramble to figure things out. I am currently going through this with a subwoofer. The paper says this: your room says FUBAR. All I can do is put my head down and continue going at it.
I really appreciate your in depth analysis. Most of my current equipment was purchased based at least partially upon reviews & opinions expressed here. RU-vid is pressuring creators to post short tiktok style content. I’m not going to base a multi thousand dollar equipment purchase on a 30 second soundbite.
Many thanks for all your hard work and passion champs! My two cents while referring to some of your invaluable subwoofer measurements: A lot of companies are trying to look good on paper/measurements using digital processing to show a flatter response. Most of them just end up looking good on paper only and sound terrible in room. It took actual listening to realise that the DSP takes away so much of the head room and introduces so much time delay, so even if we have an app to tweak the response with a subwoofer, it is not going to sound right, like ever! Not this named DI brand at least. I couldn’t pick this up from the measurements the first time, but quickly learned from this trial and error and knew what I have to avoid in the next purchase. The measurements misled me in this case. And then reading that any time domain performance below 1.5 cycle does not usually affect the sound. Found that not true as well. But again it was the measurements like how loud the sub plays at different frequencies, if it responds similarly at different SPLs and excellent time-domain paired with actual listening tests. And the biggest lesson of realising what my room will give me back at different frequencies is what helped me get the right sub for my set up. Big kudos to your team and the likes such as Erin’s, parts of ASR etc. Keep listening and measuring please!
As a long time DIY speaker builder I agree that measurements do not cover all parameters and end result of how you perceive sound. Beside a flat frequency respons cones ad a timbre to the sound, a coloration that depends on the used materials of the cone and the box it self. That's why i choose to design and build my own speakers to my taste and preferences. Beside that, there is nothing more subjective then "listening" and personal prefence. Some people loved the old Magnat sounds with ringing metal domes, others couldn't listen to them!
Aside from frequency response, the measurements that are most important to me are 1) How loudly the sub can play at certain frequencies within a certain level of distortion, and 2) How fast it is at certain frequencies, by measuring transient response (10 or 20 ms burst) at 25, 50, 100 Hz, etc. Many people think REL subs are "fast", but are they really? And many sub specs claim they can play down to 10 Hz, but how loudly and at what distortion level?
I loved the slideshow video with Anthony Grimani. By far my favorite guest on your channel. I would love to hear his take on this subject. My personal opinion is that 3rd party measurements are an amazing tool if you have a comprehensive understanding and a holistic approach. I find graphs to be more important than specs alone. My biggest wow moment was when I learned that 96db was 16 bits of dynamic range. I use this number as a cutoff for buying audio equipment and don't put much value on super high SINAD. It just has to pass the low bar.
Measurements take the human and the cost element out of the equation. They are objective criteria that the consumer may use to narrow down their options before listening and considering features. But why start with bad measuring products when you can start with the best and choose.
Excellent point. For every bad measuring audio product, there is one that measures great. In many cases fixing problems found in measurements cost nothing and it indicates lack of care in design.
@AudioScienceReview You don't seem to get good measurements from many AV Receivers but Arcam AV Receivers sound great, some of the best sounding AV Receivers you can get but not good measurements according to your tests
@@Music.Movies.67 You prove the point of measurements. As a consumer you like what you like you buy what you want. But that Árcame objectively does not perform well. You like it and enjoy it, others may not. Measurements just level the playing field, as a consumer I can start with the ones that measure good and eventually make my way to the Árcam, but there may be many others before.
Measurements are important but how it sounds in your listening room is what ultimately counts. The combination of your measurements and listening session reviews are very helpful. Data snd subjective listening are the best of both worlds. Get James a crane to review the beast speakers and subs that will be coming out down the road.
Great perspectives, Gene. I agree with you. One thing I've noticed is that there's a lack of testing for in wall speakers that could help your readers when making decisions between products and brands particularly when it's not as easy to listen before buying or not easy to return (can't really return an in-wall after you've installed it since the cut out may not match other alternatives). Something to consider where measurements may have outsized value. Otherwise fully agree with you - I have the tx-rz50 and I love the receiver and it's quality despite what ASR reviews said about some distortion.
It's so difficult to test in-walls for obvious reasons but I agree 100% I would love to have a permanent wall that can interchange speaker products for this purpose. It's something we've been considering for years and hopefully can make it happen.
Hi Gene, I really feel like Audioholics is one of very few sources which is providing relevant, helpful and objective data - so please, please keep on going that way! As for diving deeper in subwoofer measurements, one thing that still is a mystery to me is the ability of a sub to provide tactile slam and physical impact. The general opinion seems to be that this is just a matter of SPL / dynamic output capabilities. But, for example I am using 5 (five) SVS SB-2000 subwoofers in my small-sized, enclosed HT room. They are perfectly integrated with a 8-9db house curve, no dips/nulls and a very low decay time. My listening volume is around -12 to -10 (after calibration) on my Yamaha RX-A6A, there is no compression in the low end happing down to 20 Hz and I measured 110db at 10(!)Hz with REW RTA and peaks of around 120db with REW SPL meter with real movie material. Still, the tactile experience is much lower compared to a ported sub with the same driver size. I know that tactile experience is probably a very subjective thing, but perhaps this is a good reason for trying to find any kind of "objective measurement" because tactile/slam clearly this is something that the HT community is usually looking for in my opinion. Eager to hear your opinion on that one. Thanks for all your great reviews and best regards, Christian.
I go by what sounds good to me. Buy some stuff, demo it in your space is the biggest piece of advice I tell EVERYBODY. It is going to sound absolutely different in your space. Measurement is a guideline as the product will most certainly perform differently in your room.
Newcomer here, and I love this type of content, maybe cuz I'm also an EE. I'm always listening, and I've already used some of your guidance in setting up a new home audio system. Thanks!
Imaging manufacturing without measurements. Gene is simply saying there is a moving goalpost in respect of product features, room acoustics and personal preference in order to get the best or preferred sound.
I would like to understand what to look for and why to look at it. As most of us still don't understand how everything fits together. Make videos that are easy to understand and explain the lingo as you go. Most of the stuff just go over our heads.
Go ahead with the topic. Maybe it can bring us together instead of actually bashing down AND up, left and right :). As long as you do it in a way that hopefully dont offend one side or the other. In this video its was a really good balance :) (I am leaning heavy into numbers...)
I like when you do accurate measurements. I then compare them to what the manufacturer states. Just to see if they're honest. Not for sound. I really like your speaker discussions.JMHO
Measurements are just the beginning. Maybe you could do a short vid about companies who let you have home trials for listening? It would be appreciated. If you already have done this maybe provide a link?
I am reminded of the Ad from the 80's "Measures so well that we don't bother to listen". That notable brand is now Audio History. Important? Absolutely, never purchase blindly without looking them over. Conversely, never purchase a product based soley on their measurements either.
as with most things, accurate measurements prevent snake oil and falsehoods. it isn't everything but it really helps curb the high amount of BS that is very common in this community.
This subject is critical and almost always overlooked. Measurements should always be put in context assuming there will always be people who think they’re saying measurements are everything and a replacement for listening etc.
When I started out at 17, I was paranoid about specs. Now I'm not really bothered. About 15 years ago, I bought a NAD amp and had no idea about it . I still have and use. Last year I bought a 5.1 Denon for movie's only. I had a rough idea what the output might be based on input power. Apart from that I didn't bother with all the specs. So yes I would be interested to take a closer look. I did read in a magazine " if we knew what to measure we would "
Need a way to take baseline measurements that could be modeled in software to show estimated room measurements. That's the integrators experience, and guess work for the rest.
Measurements are part of the equation for sure, especially for electronics. Speakers are more subjective in my opinion and room interaction is huge. Currently rotating Zu Omens and PSB Imagine T’s. I know the Zu’s do not measure well, but they are very enjoyable and great for low level listening. I like the Imagine T’s at moderate to high volume, they measure well(you guys praised them years ago). With electronics, measurements can indicate noise(obviously) which was present on my Vincent 236mk integrated. However, I’m not sure if it’s possible to measure the impact that amp had on bass output. It was as if I added a subwooferwhen compared to similar(or more powerful) amps. The noise and terrible volume attenuation caused me to sell that amp. My Anthem STR preamp has spoiled me, my other equipment was not nearly as quiet…
I would be interested to see how the conditions of the test skew the outcome. I’m also interested in more on the topic of blending sealed and ported subs with sealed and ported speakers.
a system combining multiple types of subs and speakers would be very interesting. a sealed-ported-horn-passive membrane combination comparison could be realy interesting
I've argued this point for a long time but some folks are all about the objective data of one product over another. Even if they admit one sounds better, in their minds the other is still better bc of what the specs say.
My first AV amp measured 0.01% THD+N and it sounded awful. What interests me is how far you need to go to improve measurements, before they become inaudible. I've heard people say with much confidence that the audibility threshold is 1%, 0.1%, 0.01% or 0.001%. I'd love to know what it really is. Nick
This is a good question and a lot of amps sound bad when reaching near high power due to insufficient widebandwidth feedback or simply weak power supplies that simply can't handle low impedance loads. I will see if I can get Bruno Putzeys back on our channel to discuss.
When you get around to subs, I’m curious if the ports are tuned across the entire operating band of the sub, or if they extend just the bottom end. Thinking of whether the sub’s crossover region (80hz) has it’s phase inverted by the presence of ports. In my research into helmholz resonators, the Q of the tube’s resonance is influenced by air resistance at the end of the tube. So port flaring, and texturing could be very relevant to the bandwidth influenced by a sub’s ports. I would love you guys to do a deep dive on this.
Meassurements are hard, because what is perfect? I think just be happy with the sound you have, there's always something that could be better and also not every music track or movie track is the same...
Landed here first when looking for online HI-FI look around RU-vid now I am Back Thank for staying solid!!!! You can't create a product without measuring so keep it , I know we can't tell the quality mix of Odd/Even Harmonics ( that's actually what we love in my opinion) that being said there are many ways to add good Harmonics Today
@@Audioholics Gene your channel should be 10X the size. Great content and I have been watching for years but finally learned how to comment last year. 😂 I own a Parasound HALO and Mark Levinson power amp - they are very good but my bad measuring tube amp (custom) sounds amazing from 60-80db.
Hearing from someone who has always preached against expensive cables, (Audioquest etc) based only on measurements that measurements are not everything is something quite strange.. Shall I deduce that your reasoning only applies on electronics, speakers and not cables…??
Correct. Cable signal propagation is easily analyzed and understood. How a loudspeaker plays in a room acoustically and how a human perceives that sound is much more complex than a graph often reveals.
No, signal transmission and propagation down a cable is a very understood and proven science and does NOT involve psychoacoustics. It's a Strawman argument.
I believe its important to determine what measurements matter,what they mean,.and threshold of audibility related to those measurements. For example, i don't think it makes one bit of difference if an amp has 105 db vs 120 db Sinad. So many measurements so little time!
SINAD > 100 dB is usually completely dominated by noise. Noise is plainly audible and it is just a matter of how loud your peak playback level is. Importantly, you can have higher SINAD without it costing anything. It takes very careful engineering and closed feedback with measurements to get there. Rewarding companies who can't be bothered in that way is not wise.
@@Audioholics one more question. What are your thoughts on the Denon 6800H? A couple people also recommended it and running it in pre out mode. Thanks again.
I feel the honesty and dedication through your voice and others on your channel. Dont worry about people that have nothhing better to do other than suck. We see you
No question that measurements provide useful information but any one in isolation can easily give the wrong picture. Additonally not all 'bad' measurements are hearable resulting in people getting mislead or obsessing on the wrong things. Finally different measurements interaction with each other to produce the sound and so bad on one could be compensated on another. Understanding how they all link up to produce audioable sound would be interesting.
Audio is a matter of engineering and measurements can tell us whether or not a product is well engineered For sure a measure of art is involved but if they cant get the basics right then invest elsewhere.
Too often hobbyists (whether electrical engineers or not) who test audio/video equipment seek to validate/invalidate manufacturers specs first and often without knowledge of the way a product would perform under test conditions vice the "real world". Testing equipment and reviewing equipment are different and distinct. I prefer a "real world" translation of how these validated tests correlate to my user experience and appreciate the content providers that do that. I remember specifically an instance of a misunderstanding of how a processor truncates signals which lead to it being deemed "broken". Yet the hobbyist that tested it, refused to revisit and would not budge from their initial conclusion. Disappointing. Doubly so considering they worked with and modified their testing shortly after while working with a more exclusive brands product. Not everyone who has an Audio Precision needs to get a website to scream at us about what is "important". I thank those sites (Audioholics and Erin's Audio Corner specifically) who use their expensive test equipment to validate objective features and then provide their subjective experience living with and using a product. As I've said on other sites, if I wanted my Radiohead, Van Halen, Miles Davis, and Bach to sound like test equipment, I'd move my studio gear to my living room, but I know sound creation is different than music enjoyment/listening.
I couldn’t agree with you more Gene, our ears are our number one tool…. Perfect example I just found out the Amazon ultra HD does not compare to my old Yamaha CDX 1030. I did an ab comparison, and prefer the CD sound… Bass was so much better and sound.. CDX-1030 is hooked up analog out to my Yamaha RXZ9.
@@Audioholics OK I was going to do that but holy cow was the sound fantastic through the actual player. I’m starting to think that all these bits are just marketing snake oil.
@@Audioholics You misread his comment. He is saying the same track on Amazon streaming service sounds worse than the CD version on his CD player. This can only happen if they are different versions/masters of the track. Otherwise, it is improper listening test leading to wrong conclusion. And this is the issue with your video Gene. You are giving license to people now to ignore reliable measurements and instead, go for faulty listening tests....
@AudioScienceReview you misunderstood my video. I never downplay the importance of measurements but we also don't listen to graphs. You need a combination of both otherwise we'd come to the false conclusion that the pinnacle of audio is realized by a USB dongle or low power amplifier with exceedingly low noise and distortion, etc. That said, valid comment. Care must be taken to compare the exact same master track and that Amazon is set to lossless.
The reason I said I thought bits were becoming marketing snake oil. Was because I just for the hell of it hooked up my Yamaha CDX1030 and I was absolutely blown away how much better that sounded than streaming through Sonos, my Amazon, HD which was using the internal dac on my RXZ9. My 1030 is hooked up with the analog out, using the one bit dac in the player. And this was no small comparison, there was a pretty big difference between the two absolutely could’ve picked it apart even blinded. I was going to buy a CDS 1000. But not really sure if I’m gonna hear much of a difference, especially with death metal.
On the CEA2034 measurements I mostly check the listening window, sound power DI and early reflections DI. These and the estimated in room response are really useful to narrow down your speaker list, after that only by listening the speakers can get you what you want. But a live stream about the topic would be cool however you discussed this once with Anthony Grimani I believe
People's rooms has a lot to do with results from measurements too. Speakers can measure good in one room then not so good in another room Then there's Speakers can measure good and sound bad. Speakers can measure bad but sound good
Sometimes I find this hobby comical, just find what sounds good to you and makes you enjoy the music, end of story. Stop trying to impress your friends with your equipment and specs.
Imaging has a lot to do with: dispersion characteristics, and matching between speakers. So that data is conceivable in graphs but maybe somewhat masked in our understanding. I've measured identical speakers with the only differences being cabinet materials and the shape of the baffle. The speaker with the smoother baffle imaged much better, but it wasn't so apparent in the measurements.
Neutral sound isn't everything on speakers. Too much "wang" is really sour and fatiguing. But getting rid of the "wang" makes the speakers sound ok but boring. So a little bit of "wang" (a controlled blending) makes my speakers sound much more alive! 😊
Can you measure detail? Can you measure transients? Honest question. I believe in measurements and use them in my work (not audio) on a daily basis. But data is only as good as it is measured.
you have the Cumulative Spectral Decay, important part of detail. and also driver and speaker matching. phase and even radiation patterns is a part of the equation.
You need measurements and / or objective data and the. An opinion of the reviewers. Not just crude measurements. Measurements level the playing field, you can’t change them by being cheap or expensive. It’s the same and equalizer and then you add features and others. However in a DAC or Power Amp only have one job to do and no matter price, the measurements tell the story. So why even consider an expensive product that does not meet minimums when measured compared to products costing a fraction. Measurements are que equalizer.
Yes, I would love to see more content on this topic. One interesting factor with loudspeaker measurements, is that even brands with all the resources to measure them properly, often use the anechoic data for the initial development, but then fine tune them by ear, on more “traditional” listening conditions. This can be seen on RU-vid from the engineers that developed the Linton (and other series), while stating that they had 100 plus crossover designs tested on those loudspeakers, before making the final call. Yes, measurements are important and can certainly help in the developing process, as well as helping the consumer on trying to identify some warning signs. But the “estimated in room response” from Klippel seems to be very conservative on the actual room gains on the low end. I understand that it probably needs to be (as room modes also have the downside of nulls), but even on my diy experiments, I can predict a lot more accurately the room gain (and real frequency extension) with Winlsp! And the problem (or solution) with bass is that it has a huge influence on the perceived tonal balance. Too much and it might get the whole presentation muddy, too little and the most balanced loudspeaker is going to sound lean, or even bright/forward, no matter how linear they really are on anechoic conditions. Again, this is not to imply that measurements aren’t important (they are), but a lot of “strange” things happen when any loudspeaker is inside a particular room. Some higher end loudspeakers are known for having some sort of elevated treble. While I’m not a fan of that, I’m currently 50 years old, and I can still hear around 14.500 Hz. If a loudspeaker has a boost starting at 9.000 Hz, it will likely sound way too bright for me. But will it sound bright or just “right” for a 60 year old, that will probably hear things differently (and loudspeakers costing several hundred dollars aren’t usually bought by 20 or 30 year old people…).😉 I guess that there must be a reason why some things are the way they are. I would love to see a more in-depth analysis on how amplifier measurements relate to real-world performance. I truly believe that some forums and reviews went way overboard with the whole SINAD number chasing, and “beautiful” graph hunting. I often feel that there seems to be something really wrong with the context of those measurements. In one of those forums, it’s not uncommon to see people complaining that their record breaking SINAD amplifier has a lot of hiss at low levels (or idle), putting all the blame in the pre-amp or digital crossover, etc. While that might be the case, it’s often the result of an improper gain matching between that pre-amp and power amp, since most power amps these days have no way of controlling it. Suddenly, that extra low-noise power amplifier is having noise levels that would be unacceptable for any decent 30 year old integrated amp (connected to the same speakers and pre-amp/source/digital crossover). Suddenly, this amazing measuring amp is having a bad performance, but the source behind it might be also great and have great SINAD… …but they’re not properly matched! But my questions are: - What’s the threshold of audibility on crosstalk, harmonic distortion, etc? - Some relatively inexpensive class D amps have overall good measurements and a decent amount of continuous power, but not a lot of dynamic headroom (when compared to class AB amplifiers with similar rms power values). Considering the dynamic nature of any music, isn’t peak power something to be considered, unless the amp is so powerful that we never exceed that continuous power rating? These are some of my questions.
I agree measurements aren't everything, for example I recently bought the Sierra V1 v2 speakers that were very well reviewed by Erin's audio corner recently with some of best measurements he said he ever saw. So I bought them and I didn't like them. I have other speakers that didn't measure as well but I really liked those speakers. Websites like ASR have a lot of members that believe measurements is like a religion and they also believe that all amplifiers sound the same which is a foolish thing to say but that's another topic.
The Sierra 1s from our review over 15 years ago were a very laid back sounding speaker. I didn't care for them either despite they measured well and had great build quality.
Right, maybe you can hear differences in Loudspeaker crossover components that you can't measure a difference with, or - perish the thought - the effects of using cable risers. If you have a good enough system to allow you to hear such differences that uou can't measure
No, equating loudspeaker measurements and psychoscoustics with zero difference in how electricity flows through a cable with or without risers is a false equivalency and red herring argument.
@@Audioholics well I guess we’ll never know if you’re too afraid to visit Danny and hear for yourself. I’m open minded enough to believe there could be an effect but my own system isn’t yet revealing enough to show it and I would jump at the chance to hear it
@@stephenyoud6125 Once anyone can demonstrate electrically how a cable on the floor vs being suspended by toilet paper rolls is different and then also demonstrate in a controlled listening test those measureable differences are audible, I'd be interested. In the meantime, I'll focus on what actually does make measureable and audible differences such as loudspeaker placement, room acoustics, and EQ.
@@Audioholics you just don’t get it do you? Maybe there are things you can hear that can’t be measured. Can you measure the depth of sound stage or the realism of a breath leaving the singers lips? Until you’re willing to listen and not just try and dismiss things without listening you have no credibility with me
@@stephenyoud6125 As Spock used to say "Nothing unreal exists". By your logic, there are magical flying unicorns living on our planet that we can't see but they are here because someone says they exist. That doesn't fly in the world of engineering and science. Engineers don't design based on magic electricity that isn't understood. NASA doesn't worry about unmeasurable magical properties of cables that ONLY audiophiles know exists when sending space probes or humans deep into space.
Gene not anti measurement?!?! Audioholics is one of, if not the most measurement driven audio channels on the Tube of Yous. So glad to hear you put this perspective out. I love measurements, but there are many things measurements can't tell us about how a component sounds. Frequency response in a given space, yes. Number of watts of output prior to set distortion threshold, check. Cable resistance, easy as pie. But, soundstage, clarity, and my personal favorite, sound power (not sound pressure) do not have numerical tests.
I've never said measurements are everything. They are a starting point. Think of it as the dating phase where the listening tests will determine if you want to marry or move on 😅
Gene, So, can an audio cable measure the same as a less expensive one but sound different and maybe even better, like capacitors do? Dielectric material and induced noise change the sound. Not magic ears, trained ears. I respect your opinion and agree that hifi cables are entirely too expensive but you are paying for research and development and intellectual property.... Time is money. Garth Power is an Electrical Engineer at AudioQuest. He said you CAN measure what they are doing but you have to do the right measurements. I just swapped out my AudioQuest Rocket 88 speaker cables with one of my systems. I removed the cables with the DBS, battery, and put in place the standard Rocket 88 with NO DBS. The sound collapsed. I did not say anything but my NON Audiophile son said the sound sucked. How you do explain that?
Placebo or really poor measuring cable. Audioquest cables don't measure any better than cheap zip cord so if you downgraded from their premium stuff it must be a higher gauge, more resistance, cable. If there is an audible difference between the cables it will easily be measurable. If they measure similarly than the differences you think you're hearing are purely placebo. It's why controlled listening tests for object that make little or no difference in system performance are vital.
...a summation, a lot of test-artifacts can't be heard, Erin now has speakers that 'sound great, test bad' and top scientist at Belden says (great) test gear cost 'hundreds of thousands of dollars'. This means most test equip was not that good. They can't even show cable capacitance, for god sakes. The objective crowd is sinking in quicksand.......
