• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Stereophiles editor Jim Austin publicly disagreeing with Kal Rubinson

Status
Not open for further replies.

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,408
Likes
12,291
Location
UK/Cheshire
Is it a ridiculous strawman? Because I believe you had been trying to argue that you can determine audibility/transparency solely with measurements (and without any need for anything subjective, like listening tests). Please correct me if I got that wrong.

I offered an example earlier, the Benchmark DAC 1, which did not have a dynamic range measurement that could satisfy even the "lenient" threshold in the reference you provided. So, based solely on measurements, would you then conclude that the Benchmark DAC 1 is NOT transparent? (Because, as you argue, we don't need those subjective listening tests, right?)
You got it wrong.

The statement made is we can determine transparency/INaudibility. When measurements are above the limits (normally much above the limits as in some of the boutique distortion generators), the statement is that it may be audible, and can explain differences people state they can hear. Not that it is necessarily audible.

For example I've often stated that my learning regarding audibility here saved me from buying a new dac to replace my "poor" 85dB sinad external sound card. Even though it measured above the audibility limits I was pretty confident I'd not hear any issues.
 
Last edited:

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,408
Likes
12,291
Location
UK/Cheshire
Ok, I just put in an ASR search, with "B&W" in the title, and in about 60 seconds, I found my first hit. It's not that hard to find if you're open minded to the possibility.
View attachment 243208

How is that evidence of your actual statement, which was:

Great! Because that's ultimately where I'm coming from. It's the periodic tendency for someone here to say that Loudspeaker A can't possibly sound as good as Loudspeaker B, because they looked at the measurement graphs and the measurements don't lie. And if anyone happens to think Loudspeaker A does sound good, well then that person has defective hearing or is a moron, or both.

There was no comparison of speakers in your linked post, no disagreement on the merits of the speaker - let alone any accusations of defective hearing or of being a moron.

Only a statement that the speaker measured crap.

Or were you just strawmaning again?
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
You got it wrong.

The statement made is we can determine transparency/INaudibility. When measurements are above the limits (normally much above the limits as in some of the boutique distortion generators), the statement is that it may be audible, and can explain differences people state they can hear. Not that it is necessarily audible.
I never disagreed with that, and thank you for clarifying your position.
I thought you were making the argument you can determine transparency/inaudibility SOLELY based on measurements. Great.
 

DonR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 25, 2022
Messages
2,968
Likes
5,611
Location
Vancouver(ish)
I never disagreed with that, and thank you for clarifying your position.
I thought you were making the argument you can determine transparency/inaudibility SOLELY based on measurements. Great.
For certain components like cables you most certainly can, provided you have sufficient measurements.
 

antcollinet

Master Contributor
Joined
Sep 4, 2021
Messages
7,408
Likes
12,291
Location
UK/Cheshire
I never disagreed with that, and thank you for clarifying your position.
I thought you were making the argument you can determine transparency/inaudibility SOLELY based on measurements. Great.
We can. We can absolutely from measurements alone state a (streamer/dac/amplifier etc*) device is transparent, based on the previously linked audible limits.

*not speakers.

The reverse does not apply - we cannot state from measurements alone that differences definitely can be heard (device is not transparent)
 
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
I have to applaud JA1's attempt to reach new levels of diplomacy:
"The Bowers & Wilkins 804 D4's measured performance is enigmatic"

That’s quite a roundabout way to say they’re pretty crap


enigmatic
adjective

UK

/ˌen.ɪɡˈmæt.ɪk/ US

/ˌen.ɪɡˈmæt̬.ɪk/

mysterious and impossible to understand completely:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe the above is the entry in question. The comment, "That’s quite a roundabout way to say they’re pretty crap" refers to the use by JA1 of the word "enigmatic", one definition of which I have emboldened below. So it's a personal interpretation of JA1's business-like circumspection. Not only that, but I didn't see anyone called a "moron."

Members here can be very hard-case with gear that is quite expensive. The view is that gear must show performance commensurate with the price. I agree with that, and I agree with it wholeheartedly. Extremely high price with inferior performance should be criticized, although I agree that some posters are more circumspect than others.

Do you not agree?

Jim
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PatentLawyer

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 13, 2021
Messages
398
Likes
690
Location
Deep in the Soundstage
Those are fake US patent numbers on the Mpingo website. I just tried to look them up on uspto.gov
Those are design patent numbers, directed to the ornamental, non-functional aspects of a product. This is to be contrasted with a utility patent , with which most are more likely familiar.

Not saying the numbers are bogus or not because I’m not taking the time to check … but the fact that they are design patents says quite a bit to me.
 

Galliardist

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
2,558
Likes
3,273
Location
Sydney. NSW, Australia
Ok, I just put in an ASR search, with "B&W" in the title, and in about 60 seconds, I found my first hit. It's not that hard to find if you're open minded to the possibility.
View attachment 243208
While I'm pretty sure you will find the quote you are looking for, this isn't it: - it's reinterpreting someone else's opinion of the speaker given in Stereophile, not a direct comment on the speaker itself. There should be several that do say things directly in the same thread.

I'm not sure that "enigmatic" necessarily means that. Usually the really badly measuring ones are described using such terms as "entertaining" or "distinctive" in those reports.

And rather than B&W, I think the review here of the Wilson Audio TuneTots is the one you want to make your overall point about posters here, measurements, and listening tests.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
We can. We can absolutely from measurements alone state a (streamer/dac/amplifier etc*) device is transparent, based on the previously linked audible limits.

*not speakers.

The reverse does not apply - we cannot state from measurements alone that differences definitely can be heard (device is not transparent)
OK, I'll bite, so is the Benchmark DAC 1 USB transparent or not, based on measurements? Because per your predefined criteria using measurement thresholds, is is not transparent. Or do you just make up the measurements thresholds each time?
 

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
3,349
Likes
12,543
Location
NorCal
Those are design patent numbers, directed to the ornamental, non-functional aspects of a product. This is to be contrasted with a utility patent , with which most are more likely familiar.

Not saying the numbers are bogus or not because I’m not taking the time to check … but the fact that they are design patents says quite a bit to me.
Could not find the in USPTO data base in a search. Not patent lawyer, but have over 120 US patents and used to use that site a lot for 35 years. They keep changing the format there. Those numbers seem small or old so I will bow to your expertise.
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
While I'm pretty sure you will find the quote you are looking for, this isn't it: - it's reinterpreting someone else's opinion of the speaker given in Stereophile, not a direct comment on the speaker itself. There should be several that do say things directly in the same thread.

I'm not sure that "enigmatic" necessarily means that. Usually the really badly measuring ones are described using such terms as "entertaining" or "distinctive" in those reports.

And rather than B&W, I think the review here of the Wilson Audio TuneTots is the one you want to make your overall point about posters here, measurements, and listening tests.
OK thanks well perhaps others can look at the tunetots review. Like I said I spent 60 secs looking for an example. It wasn't an exhaustive search of the entire forum, and to be honest, if nobody believes me, that's fine. But the next time you see someone bashing a speaker based on its measurements, think back to what I wrote earlier.
 
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
. But the next time you see someone bashing a speaker based on its measurements, think back to what I wrote earlier.

I believe something needs to be clarified. This is an open public forum. No one is vetted, and no one can control what others say. You don't control what I say, and I can't control what you say. Not only that, but you're not held responsible for what I say nor am I held responsible for what you say .... or anyone else says.

That's the nature of the internet. Generally, free speech abounds. Demands can be made regarding propriety, but only a ban can stop the posters from cussing, denigrating others, displaying demeaning behavior and arguing simply for the sake of arguing. You can't prevent things like that. Amir can't, the mods can't ..... no one can. Either they're thrown out, or they are told to tone it down, which they (usually) do.

We would all hope that members display a certain degree of decorum, but some have ideas of "decorum" that are different than others. You might have a poor opinion of them, but then again they might have a poor opinion of you. You never know.

Looking back, it seems that the most acrimonious disagreements arise not from reliance on measurements, but instead from an impression that one poster displays opinions that are negative regarding another poster's cherished favorite. That starts the chicken fight, and the general demeanor devolves from there. It just proves that no place on the web is free from puerile behavior.

Unfortunately, that's the price of free speech. :)

Jim
 
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
Not so fast... If peeps say the absolutely wrong stuff then the coppers will get involved. So this is not the wild west like it was in the 90's and the early 2000's.

Dood! Please re-read what I wrote! We are, each of us, responsible for what WE say and do, but not for what OTHER people say or do.

I apologize if I was not quite clear about that. :oops: Jim
 

Doodski

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 9, 2019
Messages
20,745
Likes
20,756
Location
Canada
Dood! Please re-read what I wrote! We are, each of us, responsible for what WE say and do, but not for what OTHER people say or do.

I apologize if I was not quite clear about that. :oops: Jim
Wowowow. I had a visual aberation in my mind and saw something that was not there. Hmmmz I better have a rye and consider this. :D
 

MAB

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 15, 2021
Messages
2,134
Likes
4,779
Location
Portland, OR, USA
@preload
ASR is the only significant of the few hifi public forums that claim to start from the perspective of objectivity and scientifically demonstrated results. After all, every breakthrough in sound reproduction was obtained this way.
And in Kal's review of an Anthem amplifier, the comments thread was hijacked by a flat-earth anti-science speaker-hacking bi-wire ultra-tweaking lunatic. And Kal politely responded that they would need ABX to really discern a real difference. And Kal's own editor undercut him. And you now have posted a ton of comments (10% by count, way more by word-count) and turned this thread into an objectivism vs. subjectivism debate. While the discourse at ASR occasionally is overly objectivist, it is about the only place we can have an honest objective discussion. And, back to the Stereophile article, we've ended up in a Mars vs. Venus debate lost the starting point of the thread.
Stereophile is one of the last magazines that even makes mention that there are some objective requirements that equipment needs to meet. And the editor threw one of his reviewers under the bus for even gently correcting a fringe cult member.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom