Michael Fremer Leaving Stereophile?

[Sal1950]

Mikey claims the darTZeel NHB-468 mono's, currently about $215,000 the pair US, are the bee's knees.
John Atkinson did one of his outstanding verbal dances describing the measurements, the problems encountered, and all the rest.
In a DBT listening test against about any of the current Class D units Amir has measured here, the dZ's would be either be identical or rated inferior.
Mikeys got the prior NHB-458, I wonder what he paid for it?

darTZeel NHB-468 monoblock power amplifier Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements Because of the darTZeel NHB-468's bulk and weight, and also because the amplifiers needed to be picked up for photography as soon as Michael Fremer had finished his auditioning, I drove my Audio Precision SYS2722 systemsee the January 2008 "As We See It"its host computer...

www.stereophile.com

 

[Prep74]

The letter Fremer wrote to The Audio Critic on page 6 and Peter Aczel reply is a classic.

https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_21_r.pdf

 

[Sal1950]

and Paul Aczel reply

BTW, that's Peter Aczel.

 

[Prep74]

BTW, that's Peter Aczel.

Corrected.

 

[Holmz]

The letter Fremer wrote to The Audio Critic on page 6 and Peter Aczel reply is a classic.

https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_21_r.pdf

page 6

 

[board]

Methinks, we give MF too much weight, if I am to go by this thread.
Most reviews posts here [edit:] on ASR, can lead you to better results, audibly, repeatably, verifiably.
His reviews, OTOH will not steer you in the correct direction. Following him cannot make your system sound better. As simple as that.
I am sorry to go ad hominem, in some ways, but this is verifiable truth.

Off this thread.

Peace

Please don't think I'm trying to defend Framer, as I consider him the most obnoxious reviewer in the world, and perhaps this is simply arguing about semantics, buuuuut ... I think saying "Following him cannot make your system sound better" is not completely correct, but it might simply be a matter of definitions. Although this is an assumption, I imagine that by "better" you mean "higher fidelity", and in that way you're correct, because Framer surely doesn't favour fidelity.
But "better" is mainly a subjective term dependent on preference. To Framer his system sounds "better" now than it did before, and to many people with a similar preference his system also sounds "better" than one assembled to produce the highest fidelity.
Although I'm not a subjectivist at all, I actually also think that I even might prefer the sound of Framer's system to that of one with higher fidelity, as there's also a specific sound signature that I like, and I would even claim that many people here from ASR (but not everyone) might also prefer the sound of Framer's system to one that has higher fidelity listened to in the same room, if they were only allowed to listen to it blind rather than see the name of components or measure them.

 

[board]

Mikey claims the darTZeel NHB-468 mono's, currently about $215,000 the pair US, are the bee's knees.
John Atkinson did one of his outstanding verbal dances describing the measurements, the problems encountered, and all the rest.
In a DBT listening test against about any of the current Class D units Amir has measured here, the dZ's would be either be identical or rated inferior.
Mikeys got the prior NHB-458, I wonder what he paid for it?

darTZeel NHB-468 monoblock power amplifier Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements Because of the darTZeel NHB-468's bulk and weight, and also because the amplifiers needed to be picked up for photography as soon as Michael Fremer had finished his auditioning, I drove my Audio Precision SYS2722 systemsee the January 2008 "As We See It"its host computer...

www.stereophile.com

Like in my above post I'm not trying to defend Framer or his infamous blowup amps, but your claim that his amps would be rated identical or inferior is something that would have to be tested before we know it for sure.
Although I don't believe in all the "magic" espoused by subjectitivsts, I do believe that there are audible differences between some amplifiers, but not due to magic reasons but for reasons that are already well-known, such as the change in frequency response due to the load the loudspeakers place on the amp (and AFAIK, Atkinsons' measurements uses a very light dummy load that doesn't show the full extent of the change in frequency response that a set of speakers would place on an amp).
I compared a Naim NAC 202 + NAP 200 against an Arcam SR250 and a Nord Three SE INT-C Purifi 1ET400A Integrated, which has Purifi modules. Although I don't have measurement equipment, besides a Umik-1 Mini-DSP microphone, I did my best to match the volume levels, and I recorded some songs on all three amps with that microphone + used a volume meter on my phone, and it seemed that the largest volume level difference between the three was 0.3 dB.
The differences I heard were not enormous in any way, but still noticeable. The Arcam seemed like it had a slight midrange boost compared to the Naim, and the Nord was the brightest of the three, also when I turned the volume level down one notch, which would then make the Nord the one with the lowest volume level (and it should then in theory sound the least bright if they were identical).
Granted, the test wasn't blind, although I'm a big advocate for blind tests, but I noticed something very important: When I applied room correction, to me all three amps then sounded exactly the same, but without room correction they sounded different.
So, to me it's mainly about frequency response, although I'm making some assumptions.
In the case of the Dartzeel amps, I would also imagine that the frequency response explains its sonic signature. Whether it would be rated "inferior" to a class D amp is a matter of preference, as some would certainly like its sonic signature more than a class D amp, but I do imagine that it could be distinguished and therefore not be considered identical.

 

[ahofer]

So, to me it's mainly about frequency response

I expect that is right, plus a helping of second harmonic distortion in many cases.

 

[board]

Stanley Lipshitz should be on every 'scientific' audiophile's hero list. He was among those spearheading the first pushback in the JAES against Bob (Meridian) Stuart's dubious claim therein of the 'need' for consumer high resolution audio, back in the late 1980s.

If you're Framer, Stanley Lipshitz is on your hate list.

 

[board]

I expect that is right, plus a helping of second harmonic distortion in many cases.

It might be, but I think the audible importance of harmonic distortion is being over-estimated. Even in cases like the Dartzeel amp, which has quite high levels of distortion compared to other amps, the level of harmonic distortion is still so low that it should be inaudible or only just exactly audible. Although I'm making some assumptions now, then I doubt that the level of harmonic distortion is what causes an amp's sonic signature, unless the level really is super high (e.g. 5 % or whatever).

 

[Newman]

@board , Fremer’s entire gear assessment process revolves around sighted listening, which allows his imagination to overrun anything potentially audible in the sound waves. So stop trying to find the reasons for his choices in the sound waves.

 

[Galliardist]

@board , Fremer’s entire gear assessment process revolves around sighted listening, which allows his imagination to overrun anything potentially audible in the sound waves. So stop trying to find the reasons for his choices in the sound waves.

Damn. I thought his assessment process revolves around the price tag.

 

[mhardy6647]

BTW, that's Peter Aczel.

Peter, Paul, and Mary Aczel.

 

[Newman]

Damn. I thought his assessment process revolves around the price tag.

That’s his delusion process.

 

[board]

@board , Fremer’s entire gear assessment process revolves around sighted listening, which allows his imagination to overrun anything potentially audible in the sound waves. So stop trying to find the reasons for his choices in the sound waves.

Yes, I know that . And like Galliardist also said, the price is super important to him - if it's too cheap he clearly writes a somewhat lazy, disinterested review.
My point was simply that things are not completely black and white, and I think Fremer's choices demonstrate that as well:
In some cases a high price makes him buy something; in other cases a certain visual appearance (design) makes him buy something; in other cases it's just a certain feeling about liking something for no explainable reason that makes him buy something; in other cases yet again it really is an audible difference, although it might be small. Unless he subjects himself to an ABX test (which he won't) we will never know for sure, but we can't rule out that there could be an audible difference in certain cases - and just to be clear, I think there are audible differences in some cases, but in most cases, especially with certain types of gear like cables, etc., his preferences are either imagined or based on non-audible factors such as a visually pleasing design, the price tag, or just liking or disliking something for one reason or another.
Price alone cannot be the determing factor, because then he would have bought new equipment every time he reviews something more expensive than he already has, and he has reviewed plenty of amps, speakers and turntables that were more expensive than what he already had, and yet he didn't buy them. He has also reviewed gear that almost all of us, including him, would agree has a more pleasing visual appearance than what he already owns. I don't think he really, truly thinks that his Dartzeel amps and Wilson Speakers have had the nicest visual design of any products he has ever tested.
Lastly, he gave e.g. a Boulder phono preamp a rave review and yet didn't buy it. It was certainly expensive enough for him to buy it ($40,000). He also gave a rave review to a $350,000 amplifier and yet didn't buy it. And the list continues like that with other super expensive amps, speakers, turntables, cables, etc. that he gave rave reviews, yet didn't buy and instead bought other super expensive products.
My point is simply that it is possible that the explanation to why he bought product A and not product B is entirely because of non-audible factors, but it's also possible that at least some of his choices really do come down to audible factors, such as a certain cartridge, amplifier, phono preamp or speaker has a non-flat frequency response that he likes.
Despite how obnoxious, arrogant, conceited and foul-mouthed I find him, I think he's a more honest person than certain people give him credit for, meaning when he likes, dislikes or is indifferent about a certain product he's rarely lying about it.
I think what people just can't understand is how he could possibly have the opinions and preferences that he does, and then they start to theorize about him being a liar or being on the take, etc., when in fact he just has different preferences, and he's extremely vocal about trying to justify those preferences with lame, loud arguments, when in fact it's simply an emotional reason to why he likes something (and that emotional reason might be caused by a certain non-flat frequency response pleasing him more than a flat frequency response), and he should really just say "I simply prefer A to B".

 

[Newman]

(and that emotional reason might be caused by a certain non-flat frequency response pleasing him more than a flat frequency response)

It might, but I seriously doubt it. It would take a controlled listening test by him to determine that, and that is not part of his process.

Unless you mean the sight of a measurement of FR that is not flat, pleasing him.

 

[anmpr1]

Please don't think I'm trying to defend Framer... , buuuuut ... I think saying "Following him cannot make your system sound better" is not completely correct, but it might simply be a matter of definitions. Although this is an assumption, I imagine that by "better" you mean "higher fidelity", and in that way you're correct, because Framer surely doesn't favour fidelity. But "better" is mainly a subjective term dependent on preference. To Framer his system sounds "better" ...

What Michael Fremer is arguing is not that he 'prefers' records over digits. If it was just that, no one would care. Instead, it's that he is presented as some kind of authority who actually knows what he is talking about. Neither of which is the case.

As a 'journalist' of hi-fi (admittedly, 'hi-fi' is pretty low within the hierarchy of a generally bottom feeding profession), Fremer views his roll as a purveyor of truth, on a mission to enlighten unsuspecting audiophiles to the dangers of a wrongheaded technology.

It's not 'simply' that he prefers one format to the other... although 'simple' is an apt description of his work. In fact, with recent events in mind, I'll paraphrase the late Jiang Zemen: as a journalist Mr. Analog is both simple and naïve (but not young, as was the Hong Kong reportress that the late General Secretary famously admonished--at least you could say that she had an excuse for her ineptness, based upon her age).

Fremer argues that records (and analog recording) are better 'objectively' (quieter during playback), somehow physiologically more wholesome (a calming effect), and intellectually more 'stimulating'. Describing records as if they were a psychotropic drug, his language is frankly just plain weird. Imagine a cross between Thomas de Quincey and (in "Mikey's" more manic and uncontrollable state) Hunter Thompson-- without the former's literateness, and the latter's bizarre, made-up 'you can't take this seriously' humor.

To be honest (and I'm an honest person) it is difficult to even know what he means, half the time. And I'm not sure he knows what he means most of the time. Try and parse the following Fremerizations (picked randomly from a few interviews):

[Analog recording has] ...a sense of musical flow and harmonic grace. A more believable instrument attack and more generous sustain and for whatever reasons a greater illusion that a live performance is occurring in front of you. Vinyl makes you want to pay attention and do nothing else. Once I start playing records I can stay up all night. With digital I get bored after a short while. I think vinyl is quieter than digital. It's a different kind of quiet that's difficult to explain but when you go from digital to analog there's a sense that an unheard but felt "noise" disappears. When it does, your body relaxes.

If he was talking about an evening with his girlfriend (...um, sorry about that, Mike) I might have a better understanding of it. But a record?

And this bit of precious analogous pleasantry:

Digital preserves music the way formaldehyde preserves frogs. You kill it, and it lasts forever."

What about his technical understanding of the digital process along with the physiological limits of hearing?

Unfortunately, there are still skeptics who think CD resolution is "perfect" and that 96/24 is "hype" because it can't be heard. CDs are really “analog” in that the “land” and “pits” on a CD are really analogs of the bits, not the bits themselves.

The weird thing is not Fremer himself, although he is pretty weird. Rather, it's that anyone takes him seriously. Why is that? I'm not sure, but possibly it's too much microplastic in the environment, or lowered testosterone levels from lack of exercise and a diet of fast food. It could be anything, really.

However it is, if Fremer was funny it would be different. Unfortunately the last truly funny tweako journalist left us too soon. Will there ever be another Enid Lumley? We've been looking for someone in touch with their innate analog sensibility for a while, now. Someone who can tell us how the cosmic mysteries of the universe interact in and through their stereo. Enid had that, for sure. Mikey? Try as he will, I just don't think he brings enough to the table to meet (much less rise above) Enid's storied legacy.

 

[board]

It might, but I seriously doubt it. It would take a controlled listening test by him to determine that, and that is not part of his process.

Unless you mean the sight of a measurement of FR that is not flat, pleasing him.

Writing a long message like I did might muddy things up, so I'll write a short summary here:
Although the message I quote here doesn't say it quite as specifically, so far your messages seem to me to suggest that the reason why Fremer chose product A over product B could only be due to non-audible factors.
Whereas I'm saying that it could be either due to non-audible factors, and I'm convinced that this is often the case, but it could also be due to audible factors.
And yes, to verify it we would need him to do a blind test, which he refuses, but we cannot predict the outcome of that test, but it seems to me that you're convinced that you can predict the outcome. All I'm saying is that we don't know.

As for Fremer himself, I actually think it was your comments about him in an earlier thread that made me start writing a long document showing that to understand Fremer we shouldn't see him as a rational person but rather as a dramatic woman, and then I made a lot of comparisons between Fremer and a dramatic woman.
I can post here what I wrote here if it has any interest, but it's rather long. It was the fruit of an obsession with him after, like so many others, having tried to have a calm, reasonable discussion with him about some of his ridiculous beliefs only to be verbally abused by him, which I think has happened to anybody who has tried. Luckily, I've managed to put my obsession pretty much behind me.

 

[board]

What Michael Fremer is arguing is not that he 'prefers' records over digits. If it was just that, no one would care. Instead, it's that he is presented as some kind of authority who actually knows what he is talking about. Neither of which is the case.

Yes. It might not have been very clear from my previous messages, but one of the things that is a massive problem with Fremer is that, like so many other subjectivists, he cannot distinguish between his preference and fidelity. Just because he likes vinyl he somehow thinks that it must be a better technology than digital. His profession is probably part of it: He reviews hi-fi - high fidelity. If he admitted to preferring lower fidelity to higher fidelity it would be career suicide, but I actually think this is of lesser concern to him. I think that when he started out with his first system and then changed components and eventually ended up with what he has now then he surely got something that he liked more, and in his mind this means that it has higher fidelity, because he feeeeeeels more closely connected to the music.
I do actually know for certain that he's an emotional person, because I wrote to him and he confirmed that he usually remembers or imagines feelings rather than sounds or images. And if there's one thing I've learnt the hard way about people who are dramatic and remember feelings it's that to them their feelings equal facts.
Another problem is that he first likes something and then afterwards tries to justify it. But this is very common practice among human beings: We like something that affects our emotions in some way, and afterwards we try to find reasons to justify why we chose this thing (in the case of Fremer he tries to find technical arguments to justify the preference he already has for vinyl).
This is the opposite of the scientific method, where you first look at the evidence and let it lead you to a conclusion, rather than first draw a conclusion and then afterwards try to find evidence that supports that conclusion. But that's how most human beings are, and it applies to anything from choosing romantic partners to clothes to cars to food to politics, etc. We usually make gut, instinctual decisions rather than let the evidence lead us to a conclusion.
But it's important to point out that Fremer really, truly believes the things he says. It might be factually incorrect and unintelligble to us, but I think he's being very honest about it (most of the time).

The weird thing is not Fremer himself, although he is pretty weird. Rather, it's that anyone takes him seriously.

Yes. I do also think that we on the other side of the argument has made the mistake of taking him seriously. Just think about how many people have tried to argue with him, hoping that it could lead to a productive discussion, which it never did. The best option would probably have been to have treated him like just another crazy person with conspiracy theories.

I will, however, say that I do think he has a sense of humour and that he is charming to some extent, but he certainly displays no sense of humour whenever his idiotic beliefs are confronted. His charm and sense of humour only ever comes out when he talks about something he enjoys, and he certainly doesn't seem to have much introspection or self-deprication.

 

[Inner Space]

... I do also think that we on the other side of the argument has made the mistake of taking him seriously. Just think about how many people has tried to argue with him, hoping that it could lead to a productive discussion, which it never did. The best option would probably have been to have treated him like just another crazy person with conspiracy theories.

Judging by his accent, Fremer came up in Queens, NY, and IMO he is to audio what another famous Queens native is to politics - almost exactly. Something in the water, maybe.