Why the Obsession With Measurements Is Leading to Worse-Sounding Gear

[AJ Soundfield]

AJ, All I was asking is if he's done an MSA or not. If not, then he doesn't know with statistical rigor that his measurement system is fit-for-purpose. This just good statistical best practice. Cheers.

Once again, both his AP and NFS work can be verified. I don't follow everything Amir does (hardly anything actually, other than odd speaker measurements I may find interesting), its entirely possible some manufacturers have (or vice versa).
I worked for a mil-spec manufacturer, I understand what you're saying. This is audio fer goodness sakes, measurements of $40 dacs are umm, of slightly less importance methinks.
In fact, with many small boutique audio companies, his measurements might be the only ones you'll ever see, so take with a grain of salt. But of course, if there's some doubt, it can be repeated elsewhere.

 

[Puma Cat]

Once again, both his AP and NFS work can be verified. I don't follow everything Amir does (hardly anything actually, other than odd speaker measurements I may find interesting), its entirely possible some manufacturers have (or vice versa).
I worked for a mil-spec manufacturer, I understand what you're saying. This is audio fer goodness sakes, measurements of $40 dacs are umm, of slightly less importance methinks.
In fact, with many small boutique audio companies, his measurements might be the only ones you'll ever see, so take with a grain of salt. But of course, if there's some doubt, it can be repeated elsewhere.

Yes, understand your point and perspective.

My point could be re-interpreted in a less formal manner. You wouldn't use a yardstick to determine if sheets of printer paper are within specification. The yardstick doesn't have sufficient measurement system precision to be able do this. In other words, it's not fit-for-purpose. Same requirement applies for any audio measurement system, as well.

Cheers.

 

[atmasphere]

Why the Obsession With Measurements Is Leading to Worse-Sounding Gear

Numbers don't lie… or do they?

www.headphonesty.com

Just FWIW this was a puff piece and is misleading.

Nothing mentioned about the fact that we know what kinds of distortion are pleasant (lower ordered harmonics) and which kind are not. Nor the fact that we can tell a good deal about how the amp or preamp might sound once we know what the distortion signature looks like.

No mention of the implications of distortion rise with frequency... I can go one but you get the point.

 

[Hiker]

Great article. I totally agree with this that if it measures great it does not mean it sounds good. If that was the case I was on audio science review and not on audioshark.

A statement I posted before and that is now explained. It is musicality that counts, not numbers.

The great Sidney Corderman with McIntosh said that "if it measures good it should sound good". That has always been my finding.

 

[atmasphere]

The great Sidney Corderman with McIntosh said that "if it measures good it should sound good". That has always been my finding.

Actually that is lightly based on Daniel Von Recklinghausen's quote "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you've measured the wrong thing." Von Recklinghausen was head engineer at HH Scott.

This is a stand right between what we hear and what we measure and correctly states that if it sounds good or bad, we should be able to measure and see why that is so. IMO there is a dearth of knowledge about what it is that makes something sound good or not including with people that do the measurements.

 

[a.wayne]

Never heard measured good sound bad with electronics , usually they sound as they measure.

Loudspeakers are a bit different in a few situations but mostly the same measurement vs sound metrics apply.

Edit: Full bench measurements not the hand pick what looks best to print deals ..


Regards