An observation of measurement....
treitz3
Posts: 19,004
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
While this statement wasn't written by me, it did make me think. Why would a person rely on a measurement that doesn't exist yet to evaluate a given amp?
Where are the measurements for imaging?
Where are the measurements for the size of the venue the recording was held in?
Where are the measurements for the depth of the sound stage -vs- listening position?
Where are the measurements on that compares to the recording and how well the speaker portrays it?
Where are the measurements for the atmosphere [overall 3-D]?
Where are the measurements for the transparency of the speakers disappearing in front of you?
Where are the measurements that can accurately give the end result of natural rolloff as it hits your ears?
Where are the measurements of texture in a woman's and especially a man's voice?
Where are the measurements for mid-range purity that you just can't put your finger on?
Where are the measurements for the presence of things that were not intended to be in the recording, like a pencil snapping as someone walks across the back stage and how real it sounds?
Where are the measurements for being able to tell EXACTLY where the guitar player is in front of you, how high or low he is from you, how far away he is from you and where his fingers are plucking the guitar in relation to where he is strumming the guitar, especially when there are 3 guitarists and they are all playing simultaneously? On a stellar system, you can pinpoint all of the aforementioned.
Measure that!
Allow me to go back to the original quote which brought me to these thoughts....
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
While this statement wasn't written by me, it did make me think. Why would a person rely on a measurement that doesn't exist yet to evaluate a given amp?
Where are the measurements for imaging?
Where are the measurements for the size of the venue the recording was held in?
Where are the measurements for the depth of the sound stage -vs- listening position?
Where are the measurements on that compares to the recording and how well the speaker portrays it?
Where are the measurements for the atmosphere [overall 3-D]?
Where are the measurements for the transparency of the speakers disappearing in front of you?
Where are the measurements that can accurately give the end result of natural rolloff as it hits your ears?
Where are the measurements of texture in a woman's and especially a man's voice?
Where are the measurements for mid-range purity that you just can't put your finger on?
Where are the measurements for the presence of things that were not intended to be in the recording, like a pencil snapping as someone walks across the back stage and how real it sounds?
Where are the measurements for being able to tell EXACTLY where the guitar player is in front of you, how high or low he is from you, how far away he is from you and where his fingers are plucking the guitar in relation to where he is strumming the guitar, especially when there are 3 guitarists and they are all playing simultaneously? On a stellar system, you can pinpoint all of the aforementioned.
Measure that!
Allow me to go back to the original quote which brought me to these thoughts....
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
Post edited by treitz3 on
Comments
-
As an engineer I can tell you that the people that advocate specs and measurements are not aware of the limitations of both, either due to no technical education or a poor one. You can only measure and specify properties for which measures and equipment exist. Your post touches on some facets not measurable. The greatest non-measurable in my mind is the bio-psychological interaction of the human senses and brain with the music.SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette
-
It is truly amazing what simple, cone-shaped materials affixed to simple electromagnets can produce when fed a proper signal.
-
I'm also astounded when I consider the full range and detail of sound that can be embedded in the grooves of a record. It all just seems too simple to actually work.
-
It's never as big as you think it is.
Just my own observation of measurement.Ludicrous gibs! -
Silly man... the answer is obvious; we can't measure it, therefore, it doesn't exist. Sheesh.. have to explain everything to you kids...
And get off my lawn. Turntable: Empire 208
Arm: Rega 300
Cart: Shelter 501 III
Phono Pre: Aural Thrills
Digital: Pioneer DV-79ai
Pre: Conrad Johnson ET3 SE
Amp: Conrad Johnson Evolution 2000
Cables: Cardas Neutral Reference
Speakers: SDA 2.3TL, heavily modified -
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
While this statement wasn't written by me, it did make me think. Why would a person rely on a measurement that doesn't exist yet to evaluate a given amp?
Where are the measurements for imaging?
Where are the measurements for the size of the venue the recording was held in?
Where are the measurements for the depth of the sound stage -vs- listening position?
Where are the measurements on that compares to the recording and how well the speaker portrays it?
Where are the measurements for the atmosphere [overall 3-D]?
Where are the measurements for the transparency of the speakers disappearing in front of you?
Where are the measurements that can accurately give the end result of natural rolloff as it hits your ears?
Where are the measurements of texture in a woman's and especially a man's voice?
Where are the measurements for mid-range purity that you just can't put your finger on?
Where are the measurements for the presence of things that were not intended to be in the recording, like a pencil snapping as someone walks across the back stage and how real it sounds?
Where are the measurements for being able to tell EXACTLY where the guitar player is in front of you, how high or low he is from you, how far away he is from you and where his fingers are plucking the guitar in relation to where he is strumming the guitar, especially when there are 3 guitarists and they are all playing simultaneously? On a stellar system, you can pinpoint all of the aforementioned.
Measure that!
Allow me to go back to the original quote which brought me to these thoughts....
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
permission to post this on Audioholics? hee hee hee
Living Room 2 Channel -
Schiit SYS Passive Pre. Jolida CD player. Songbird streamer. California Audio Labs Sigma II DAC, DIY 300as1/a1 Ice modules Class D amp. LSi15 with MM842 woofer upgrade, Nordost Blue Heaven and Unity interconnects.
Upstairs 2 Channel Rig -
Prometheus Ref. TVC passive pre, SAE A-205 Amp, Wiim pro streamer and Topping E50 DAC, California Audio Labs DX1 CD player, Von Schweikert VR3.5 speakers.
Studio Rig - Scarlett 18i20(Gen3) DAW, Mac Mini, Aiyma A07 Max (BridgedX2), Totem Mites -
By all means.....you lookin' to get banned over there or somethin'? :biggrin:~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
-
Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
All kidding aside, Tom does bring up a good point. I for one get sick at times of measurements being tossed around as if they are the be all,end all, of a piece of gear. Tube amps are a great example, the distortion levels when measured say it should sound like crap, same with spinning records, but we all know the opposite is true.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
If you're listening to the gear, and not the music...you ain't there yet. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't take alot of money to get there.Source: Bluesound Node 2i - Preamp/DAC: Benchmark DAC2 DX - Amp: Parasound Halo A21 - Speakers: MartinLogan Motion 60XTi - Shop Rig: Yamaha A-S501 Integrated - Shop Spkrs: Elac Debut 2.0 B5.2
-
The best gear across all price points has the same thing in common. After all the measurements are complete, the final sound signature is arrived at via repeated human listening sessions and design tweaks. A few forums majorities will never admit to such truth, because measurements rule all, and every possible measurement is already being done. I just wish every audio hobbyist could spend time talking with designers, I can't tell you how enlightening it has been to hear how each of them reaches the final product.Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
Former Staff Member TONEAudio
2 Ch. System
Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3 -
Eye to eye, brother. Eye to eye.I just wish every audio hobbyist could spend time talking with designers
Having it actually happen and implemented? About as likely as winning the 620 Million Dollar Lottery.~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~ -
Eye to eye, brother. Eye to eye.
Having it actually happen and implemented? About as likely as winning the 620 Million Dollar Lottery.
That's where the value of RMAF, AXPONA, THE Show, etc. come into play, and benefit the hobby so much.Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
Former Staff Member TONEAudio
2 Ch. System
Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3 -
Like they'd listen. How are they supposed to know who you are and how good your listening skills are? To them? You are just a consumer who isn't at their "level".~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
-
"There are no taste test machines that I know of and why we rely on test equipment to tell us an amp is good is beyond me."
Hey, I said that! I cant believe I said something that made someone else think. I guess I'm doing something right.
We use dogs to sniff out bombs and drugs. Our senses are better that almost all technology that we try to use to replace them. The problem with using our senses is that because we are human we can fool ourselves sometimes. But I still believe my ears for the most part.Main system: Lyngdorf TDAI 2170 w/ Pioneer 42" plazma-> Polk LSiM 703 w/Tivo, Marantz tuner, BRPTT: Nothingham Spacedeck-> Pioneer PL L1000 linear arm-> Soundsmith DL 103R-> SUT->Bottlehead ErosDigital: I3 PC w/ Jriver playing flac -> Sonore Ultrarendu -> Twisted Pair Audio ESS 9028 w/ Mercury IVY Vinyl rips: ESI Juli@24/192-> i3 PC server -
Yes, sir. You did. I was wondering when you would chime in.Hey, I said that!
You got me thinking last night about measurements and this thread was the end result. I can't stand it when folks chime in about watts and or current being the be all to end all. Yes, they may get you loud, they may get you what you have not experienced before but they will NOT get you bliss.
Measurements are not the end all to be all to audio. My thoughts aforementioned are why. Thank you for your thoughts, as they lead me to mine in a very drunken state. BTW, I apologize to those who expected perfect grammar, flowing sentences and perfect English. All of that goes to the wayside when I'm on the beer.
That said, when I'm on the beer this is what you get. Pure, unadulterated Tom.~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~ -
Well. When it comes to loudspeakers, I would submit that all of the spatial stuff can be explained by accurate reproduction of complex waveforms (think of radiating wave fronts in space). If you think about Fourier series, basically every wave form can be represented by superposition of sine waves of appropriate frequency, amplitude, and phase. If a given hifi system in a room exactly reproduces the wavefront of an actual performance (from whence come the directional cues, etc. that get these nebulous "audiophile" terms like "soundstage" attached to them), it is manifesting linear and accurate reproduction of phase, frequency, and amplitude. The goal of all the quantitative measurements that have been used (and are still being used, to some extent) is to quantify and objectify these parameters.
That said, I am pretty much a "listen and see" kind of person... but certainly in principle it can all be measured. No fairies or magic or even quantum physics (well, OK, there is that, but generally not consequential other than ultimately underpinning how electronics work) need to be invoked to explain qualitative and quantitative differences in sound reproduction. -
Like they'd listen. How are they supposed to know who you are and how good your listening skills are? To them? You are just a consumer who isn't at their "level".
You'd be surprised how open many designers actually are at these events. They do enjoy telling you their "process". You don't have to be a member of the "press" to get them talking, just have an honest interest.Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
Former Staff Member TONEAudio
2 Ch. System
Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3 -
Well said Mark.mhardy6647 wrote: »Well. When it comes to loudspeakers, I would submit that all of the spatial stuff can be explained by accurate reproduction of complex waveforms (think of radiating wave fronts in space). If you think about Fourier series, basically every wave form can be represented by superposition of sine waves of appropriate frequency, amplitude, and phase. If a given hifi system in a room exactly reproduces the wavefront of an actual performance (from whence come the directional cues, etc. that get these nebulous "audiophile" terms like "soundstage" attached to them), it is manifesting linear and accurate reproduction of phase, frequency, and amplitude. The goal of all the quantitative measurements that have been used (and are still being used, to some extent) is to quantify and objectify these parameters.
That said, I am pretty much a "listen and see" kind of person... but certainly in principle it can all be measured. No fairies or magic or even quantum physics (well, OK, there is that, but generally not consequential other than ultimately underpinning how electronics work) need to be invoked to explain qualitative and quantitative differences in sound reproduction."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
Still, the waves may hit the ears of a so called "audiophile" that has a difference of width to his/her ears. While what you say may be true, is there a measurement that can justify the difference and scientifically justify why all of the aforementioned non-measurable perimeters are different among loudspeakers?~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
-
I have talked to many a designer and builder. I just got off the phone with one about 20 minutes ago. The #1 thing they tell me is that cost-vs-profit is the biggest factor in the decision.You'd be surprised how open many designers actually are at these events. They do enjoy telling you their "process". You don't have to be a member of the "press" to get them talking, just have an honest interest.
Without getting into detail, I have heard this many times. It's frustrating to tell these guys what is expected and how to achieve it......and learning that they ultimately agreed with me. AAAAARGH!!! Cost.......I'm tired of hearing it.
Just build the damned thing then figure out what it will ultimately cost the consumer after the sound has been perfected to the degree that humans are capable of with today's technology. If they build it, they will come......ever hear of that before????~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~ -
A speaker with good polar response and low distortion will generally image/soundstage well, depending on the room/placement, associated electronics, etc...Still, the waves may hit the ears of a so called "audiophile" that has a difference of width to his/her ears. While what you say may be true, is there a measurement that can justify the difference and scientifically justify why all of the aforementioned non-measurable perimeters are different among loudspeakers?"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
With the limited capabilities of the the tools currently available to us to measure what we think is about important about sound quality, and our even more limited ability to understand what it is we should be measuring, it's safe to say current measurements don't even let us know what we don't know.
The human ear, on the other hand, is a miraculous thing.VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
NAD SS rigs w/mods
GIK panels -
Evolution has gifted the human ear and brain with phenomenal acuity in the realm of human speech - what we'd call the midrange. Speakers' gotta get the midrange right, or they are just wastin' space.
-
mhardy6647 wrote: »Well. When it comes to loudspeakers, I would submit that all of the spatial stuff can be explained by accurate reproduction of complex waveforms (think of radiating wave fronts in space). If you think about Fourier series, basically every wave form can be represented by superposition of sine waves of appropriate frequency, amplitude, and phase. If a given hifi system in a room exactly reproduces the wavefront of an actual performance (from whence come the directional cues, etc. that get these nebulous "audiophile" terms like "soundstage" attached to them), it is manifesting linear and accurate reproduction of phase, frequency, and amplitude. The goal of all the quantitative measurements that have been used (and are still being used, to some extent) is to quantify and objectify these parameters.
That said, I am pretty much a "listen and see" kind of person... but certainly in principle it can all be measured. No fairies or magic or even quantum physics (well, OK, there is that, but generally not consequential other than ultimately underpinning how electronics work) need to be invoked to explain qualitative and quantitative differences in sound reproduction.
You are aware that e = mc2 has been proven to be an inequality, right? We are currently at the magnifying glass level compared to the electron microscope (which is still a terribley coarse measurement tool in the scope of things) when it come to supposedly "measuring" for sound quality.
Do you really think the parameters you mention above capture the essence of sound quality?VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
NAD SS rigs w/mods
GIK panels -
I have never really paid any attention to specs except to the wpc spec, and not even then until I got my Parasound amp which told my ears that more was better since the difference between my 50 wpc Rotel & 110wpc Denon receiver didn't come close to showing me what my good old reliable RTA-8T's were capable of.
But others swear by the softer rounding lower wattage tubes affect on their gear and music.
All of the specs in the world will NEVER exactly match everyones different levels of hearing & satisfaction levels.
So ignore the specs and simply concentate on what sounds good to YOUR ears.Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2 -
Mike, I know this and so do you. You have your complaints with your system and I have never talked to you about them. I have my complaints about mine. I have complaints about some of the most stellar systems I have heard on this forum and complaints about those systems that cost well over 200K.
Still doesn't measure what the good ol' ears hear. Hell, I have been in a room with a well trusted, close to golden ear cat before [member of this forum] that didn't hear the heart-throbbing, headache inducing nightmare of some sort of sound that an MBL 360 degree plasma speaker produced while on idle with all MBL gear as well as a highly rated, touted and talked about RTR tape deck that to me sounded like a modded BLOSE radio.~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~ -
inspiredsports wrote: »You are aware that e = mc2 has been proven to be an inequality, right? We are currently at the magnifying glass level compared to the electron microscope (which is still a terribley coarse measurement tool in the scope of things) when it come to supposedly "measuring" for sound quality.
What????....Never mind, I don't really want to know or care!:eek::biggrin: Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2 -
Cathy, I don't know you that well but I think I just fell in love with you.So ignore the specs and simply concentrate on what sounds good to YOUR ears.~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
