High-End Audio Faces a Reckoning

[nicoff]

J Gordon Holt a leader in promoting subjective reviews and the founder of Stereophile was not opposed to objective testing (and blind tests). He actually saw that opposition as an industry failure.

45 Years of Stereophile | Stereophile.com

It was 45 years ago this month that the first issue of Stereophile, just 20 pages in length, went in the mail. It had been founded by one J. Gordon Holt. Gordon had been technical editor of High Fidelity magazine in the 1950s, and was tired of being asked to pander to the demands of advertisers.

www.stereophile.com

 

[nicoff]

Proof: It takes just 9 seconds to realize they are all full of shit.

Careful the report say that users spend only 9 seconds on THIS site

 

[Michaels HiFi]

J Gordon Holt a leader in promoting subjective reviews and the founder of Stereophile was not opposed to objective testing (and blind tests). He actually saw that opposition as an industry failure.

45 Years of Stereophile | Stereophile.com

It was 45 years ago this month that the first issue of Stereophile, just 20 pages in length, went in the mail. It had been founded by one J. Gordon Holt. Gordon had been technical editor of High Fidelity magazine in the 1950s, and was tired of being asked to pander to the demands of advertisers.

www.stereophile.com

I have several friends who are engineers who test things to the extreme. The three of us were out once and I posed the question to them: "what do they think of measurements done on audio gear (they are not audiophiles) in which people make judgments on how good gear is or how it will sound".

They all agreed it's a fool's errand for anyone to actually take any measurements seriously: there are so many different ways to test the same thing, so many different variables in gear used, so many ways you can manipulate the data (intentionally or accidentally) that unless it's the same person, using the same gear, and never moving the equipment at all to minimize variables, that it's basically completely manginess to rely on measurements from different people on gear.

I found it an interesting take and certainly one that I as a non-engineer had ever thought of. Basically even the measurements have such variable between people doing the measuring they are meaningless to apply any weight to.

I don't think most people have issues with measurements per se. I think the issue is with how the value of measurements and how much weight they put on them by many is not balanced.

 

[nc42acc]

I wonder why the "measurebator" forums bring so many fans? I understand basic measurements can show major flaws but not a tool for measuring subjective sound quality. What type of content attracts all audio interested people to specific forums? Seems a very high schoolish "click" enviroment.

 

[Mike]

I wonder why the "measurebator" forums bring so many fans? I understand basic measurements can show major flaws but not a tool for measuring subjective sound quality. What type of content attracts all audio interested people to specific forums? Seems a very high schoolish "click" enviroment.

Because they don’t know how to listen and want someone else to tell them what measures best so they don’t have to think.

 

[nc42acc]

Because they don’t know how to listen and want someone else to tell them what measures best so they don’t have to think.

Zombie generation Mike

 

[JCS123]

Amir has had his ass handed to him by numerous manufacturers who disagree with how Amir takes his measurements. I've never seen that happen to John Atkinson from Stereophile. Choose your gurus wisely.

Very true. JA is the gold standard when it comes to both measuring and listening when doing a review, as far as I am aware.

 

[Michaels HiFi]

Because they don’t know how to listen and want someone else to tell them what measures best so they don’t have to think.

Bingo.

I also think there is an angle among many of them who are just jealous we have a nicer system then they do. These people are easy to spot as they keep throwing out the word "greed" for any hifi item that costs more than their simple self-assumed sum of its parts (they aren't smart enough to understand labor, shipping, rent, taxes, holding costs, duties, marketing costs, and company salaries).

They claim this "greed" while typing it on their shiny new $2,000 iPhone they bought while drinking a $12 Starbucks uber-coffer-something-or-other. They don't see the irony of their regurgitated talking points.

To be clear, I have no issue with people who believe cheap systems are just as good as higher end ones. If that brings them happiness then that's all that matters. The issue becomes when they focus their brainwashed-rants by going after those with nicer systems. The amount of stupid comments on a simple video or Facebook posts on DAC's or cables or even vibration control makes you realize the bitterness and animosity many of these people live by towards others.

In many instances their anger is their daily driving force in life.

 

[Michaels HiFi]

I dont go that far . There is certainly right and wrong but the dogma that surrounds it doesn't work. You can put Ketchup on a Filet Mignon at Peter Luger's I don't think that is right but its your steak and your money. I have seen and heard some really awful examples of high end systems they were all WRONG in many ways but if the owner liked it then good for him.
Audio has become a selection of words that hold less and less meaning every year.
Natural, organic, musical, liquid, dry etc. This destruction of the language ( this is everywhere not just audio) makes communicating ideas almost impossible

I look at it differently - I don't know how or what someone else hears and can't put myself in their head. Therefore if they like it, yet it doesn't sound good to me, who am I to say my hearing is right and theirs is wrong? That's not to say I can't have an opinion, it simply doesn't make my opinion ore valid enough to call them wrong.

I'm pretty simple in that it's their money, and if they are happy that's the most important thing. I don't assume my hearing is more right or better than theirs.

It's just different.

 

[Mechnutt]

Bingo.

I also think there is an angle among many of them who are just jealous we have a nicer system then they do. These people are easy to spot as they keep throwing out the word "greed" for any hifi item that costs more than their simple self-assumed sum of its parts (they aren't smart enough to understand labor, shipping, rent, taxes, holding costs, duties, marketing costs, and company salaries).

They claim this "greed" while typing it on their shiny new $2,000 iPhone they bought while drinking a $12 Starbucks uber-coffer-something-or-other. They don't see the irony of their regurgitated talking points.

To be clear, I have no issue with people who believe cheap systems are just as good as higher end ones. If that brings them happiness then that's all that matters. The issue becomes when they focus their brainwashed-rants by going after those with nicer systems. The amount of stupid comments on a simple video or Facebook posts on DAC's or cables or even vibration control makes you realize the bitterness and animosity many of these people live by towards others.

In many instances their anger is their daily driving force in life.

I have thought the same thing for so many years. It is really bad on ASR, SHF and Redditt. Some one will ask about a $1500 TT and these snarky people try to steer him to a Fluance RT-85. And so many of the guys use internal phono preamps on their budget TT.

 

[W9TR]

I wonder why the "measurebator" forums bring so many fans? I understand basic measurements can show major flaws but not a tool for measuring subjective sound quality. What type of content attracts all audio interested people to specific forums? Seems a very high schoolish "click" enviroment.

Measurements based forums provide a clear view of product performance based on fact not opinion. This is the draw. Even if it is wrong.

The problem with ASR is they do not use industry standard test methodologies like AES 17-2020.

 

[Dylan]

May I throw my 2 cents into the “ we all hear differently” issue?
I don’t think the issue is that we all hear differently. I think the issue is that no stereo in the world can even remotely duplicate the sound of many kinds of live music, so we each have a different priority of what helps us pretend we’re hearing the original musical event.
Case in point- we went to a restaurant in Alexandria, VA last night that had a big band jazz band- I counted 17 pieces plus the singer. The only ones that were amplified were the keyboard, electric guitar and singer. All else unamplified. When the band got going, the sound was unbelievable. No you coudn’t hear the fingers on the strings of the guitar, the valves on the horns or the exact placment of the instruments, but the sound of the live music was breathtaking. I turned to my friend (also an audiophile) at one point and said “no stereo in the world can even come close” and he nodded his head.
So I think the issue is that every recording and stereo in the world only presents a facsimile or suggestion of the live performance. And people have different priorities as to how to try recreate the live performance in their mind. Some like to hear every detail, some like a strong soundstage, some like hearing the highs or bass, some like dynamic range- whatever helps you create the illusion in your mind of a live performance. To me that accounts of the wide variation of what stereos people like, and what stereos people design, rather than “we all hear differently”.
What a treat to hear this band in a restaurant!