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

The 70’s distortion wars and Stereo Review’s Julian “I never met a component I didn’t like” Hirsch have been replaced by something much worse: the ASR Amir ‘SINAD’ 1 kHz test that appears to me to be negatively correlated to listening pleasure.
The thing to understand about ASR's SINAD is that it is essentially just THD + noise. It share the same problem that single-number THD did in the '70s and '80s. Amir touts SINAD as valid because "other measurements tend to correlated" with it.

Well not really, IMHO. Personally I pay a lot of attention to the harmonic distortion spectra. What "musical"? Look for high(ish) 2nd order distortion. What crisp and transparent? Look for very low distortion, especially very low higher order distortion.
 
Personally I have found that equipment that measures extremely well also sounds great to my ear. That is, I believe there is a correlation between good measurements and subjectively good sound.

But that's just me. It is still true that some folks aren't interested in the accurate sound that extremely well-measuring equipment delivers. They may prefer less well-measuring equipment for its "musicality". The fact is that that so-called musicality is most often the result of high 2nd / 3rd order harmonic distortion.

IMHO, those distortions are benign or pleasant and mask higher-order distortions and defects on the source recordings to some extent. However they cause lack of detail, transparency, and micro-dynamics. Choose your poison.

Give a listen to all the 200 Dollar DACs and amps that are reviewed on ASR that have stellar spec's and tell me if they still sound great. I own a couple of those cheap chinese DAC's for a TV and a bedroom system and while they spec well, they only sound good with cheap gear. Put them in a reference system and they sound below average.

My Parasound A21 had better spec's for the most part compared to my Pass X250 but it did not sound nearly as good.
However, I get what you are saying. There are exceptions for sure. Spec's are a place to start.
 
Give a listen to all the 200 Dollar DACs and amps that are reviewed on ASR that have stellar spec's and tell me if they still sound great. I own a couple of those cheap chinese DAC's for a TV and a bedroom system and while they spec well, they only sound good with cheap gear. Put them in a reference system and they sound below average.

My Parasound A21 had better spec's for the most part compared to my Pass X250 but it did not sound nearly as good.
However, I get what you are saying. There are exceptions for sure. Spec's are a place to start.

A more fair comparison against the X250 would have been the JC5 at its original price.
 
I was making fun of folks that rely on measurements alone.

I've personally never known anyone who bought high end gear based on measurements alone. I'm sure they exist though.

Measurements do play an important part in selecting gear for your system. You need to ensure output impedance of source gear is compatible with the input of what it's connected to. If you use low output MC cartridges, you need to make sure your new phono preamp has enough gain to amplify the output of your cartridge.

If you have speakers with a low nominal impedance and low sensitivity, they have to paired with an amplifier that can drive this type of load. The list goes on and on.

The bottom line is measurements play an important role in choosing gear, but once the measurements have been determined to be compatible with your system, you need to listen to the gear in your system to determine if you like the sound.

Sometimes we have to take a leap of faith based on the reputation of the manufacturer to provide great sounding gear because there is no way to hear it in your system without purchasing it.
 
Why, then, do so many older audiophiles resist objective measurements? They insist on trusting only their ears
That is untrue. "Trusting only ears" is the definition of a controlled/blind listening evaluation. Audiophiles "listen" only with their eyes, ears, beliefs, biases, zero level matching, confounders, etc.
The complete opposite of the oft brayed "Just listen, trust ears". Basic cognizance of words meanings.
A "trust only ears" eval means audiophiles having a laugh, or scampering for the door ;-). I've done a few.
 
JA’s measurements and conclusions at Stereophile have always made that clear; he often wonders about the lack of correlation between some of his measurements and the perceived sound
See my above response. Not a single Stereophile evaluation is done for "perceived sound" alone. There are 20 confounders, looks, price, manufacturers tripe, street cred etc all part of the "perception/listening".
 
The bottom line is measurements play an important role in choosing gear, but once the measurements have been determined to be compatible with your system, you need to listen to the gear in your system to determine if you like the sound.
Believe it or not I agree with you ;-).
The entire experience matters
 
See my above response. Not a single Stereophile evaluation is done for "perceived sound" alone. There are 20 confounders, looks, price, manufacturers tripe, street cred etc all part of the "perception/listening".
That is not what I meant; my comment was that JA does not find that measurements can tell you how a component “sounds”. I was not commenting on other parts of the review process or its conclusions
 
JA does not find that measurements can tell you how a component “sounds”
That's his problem. Controlled listening tests can and do correlate measurements and sound. For the longest time. The opposite of what choir singers and audiophiles believe.
However, as I've stated many times, no one listens blind, ALL senses are involved when "listening". So whereas measurements do correlate to soundwaves>ears in reality, it is indeed best to chose based on whatever one likes best...to all senses.
 
Many, many times JA notes that during his testing that certain anomalies are present. Then he goes on to say the reviewer didn't mention any problems during his listening sessions in the area(s) the anomalies were present. So, as mep points out it is advisable to match components electrically but imho I don't care much more about measurements than that. BTW, I would never match a 20wpc tube amp with Maggies but that's just common sense.
 
Many, many times JA notes that during his testing that certain anomalies are present. Then he goes on to say the reviewer didn't mention any problems during his listening sessions in the area(s) the anomalies were present.
And many times he states explicitly that a measurement correlates to what is heard. Gee whiz, I guess not all reviewers hear that well when "listening" and/or not everything measurable is audible.
Let's just throw out the baby with the bathwater then.
 
And many times he states explicitly that a measurement correlates to what is heard. Gee whiz, I guess not all reviewers hear that well when "listening" and/or not everything measurable is audible.
Let's just throw out the baby with the bathwater then.
Most of the replies here (I think including mine and yours) seem to indicate that both measurements and listening are important in evaluating an audio component; I don't think too many are suggesting what you imply in your last sentence. I and most (I suspect) agree that totally subjective reviews (a la TAS) are about as meaningless as totally objective reviews (a la ASR), and it unfortunate that neither "camp" seems willing to acknowledge that the other POV is also useful and necessary.
 
Back
Top