Accurate and boring or colored and fun

[Grumpish]

There are things in hi-fi we can't yet measure? No.

Maybe. Are we measuring the right things, and do we know enough about how different individuals process what they hear? Maybe not.

Should amplifiers be tested against real life loads rather than passive loads? Should much more weighting be given to high order uneven harmonic distortion? Just two examples from recent threads - I am sure there are plenty more out there.

 

[Doodski]

Should amplifiers be tested against real life loads rather than passive loads?

That's a good one although it makes for a non-standardized process that can't be repeated with any degree of repeatability and accuracy.

Maybe. Are we measuring the right things, and do we know enough about how different individuals process what they hear? Maybe not.

The issue with this tact is that we are measuring things and not using ears to measure. Again we use globally standardized quantities and standards to measure everything from electrons, color, time to wheat and rice. That's why we have government weights and measures departments and global standards so everywhere people are using the same reference or so goes the idea.

 

[DSJR]

Maybe. Are we measuring the right things, and do we know enough about how different individuals process what they hear? Maybe not.

Should amplifiers be tested against real life loads rather than passive loads? Should much more weighting be given to high order uneven harmonic distortion? Just two examples from recent threads - I am sure there are plenty more out there.

Amps are a done deal really and as technology has moved on with better and more consistent devices, there really is less room for errors or 'characteristics' unless deliberately designed in - I mean, a dear friend of mine is on a Stasis inspired Nakamichi amp kick and his new/old pride and joy, a large size PA7, is now being refurbished as one channel runs rather hotter than the other (a known thing in these thirty odd year old amps apparently). I nearly fainted when I saw it has something like SIXTEEN output transistors a channel which will need to thermally stabilise as the amp 'warms up.' I owned a PA5mk2 for a while and ended up leaving it on 24/7 and covering the indicator lamps so my parents didn't see it (when I moved out, my mother told me they saved a fortune in electricity bills!!!) Some years after the Stasis circuit was designed, more powerful devices came along and I suspect a similarly powerful (300WPV at 8 ohms) model could be designed using rather less output transistors for example. The result of amp output impedance into real speaker loads has been acknowledged for decades (it was regularly hinted at in mid 80's UK 'HiFi Choice books but taken no further in the text to risk rocking certain boats I suspect)

Our ears really ARE NOT that good - and they've been researched over the last hundred years or more, many papers have been written and peer reviewed I gather and so there's next to nothing about hearing that 'we' don't understand - apparently... What we CAN'T measure well it seems, is the mind's interpretation of what is heard and this is where all the subjective 'stuff' comes from. Our subjective opinion can change on a sixpence/dime depending on all manner of external influences (mood/health, weather/humidity and even the listening room decor, let alone its acoustics) but until that's happened to you, it's difficult to understand. I maintain we all hear the same thing, but it's how we individually interpret it subjectively in conjunction with our other senses (and wallet size of course) and this is where it gets difficult...

 

[charleski]

But what do they do not consider was everything else the Linn is.
A unit with multiple inputs and outputs, a streamer, a pre amp, has room acoustics EQ SW, balance control, output attenuation, a phone amp, has air play, internet radio, tidal, qobuz,…..many useful things.

So you're saying the product's features matter as well?
Uh, OK. I don't think you'll find many people who'll disagree with that. Amir doesn't bother with doing a complete run-down of all the functionality a product offers simply because the manufacturers do that themselves in their marketing and it would be a waste of time. What the vast majority of manufacturers don't do is provide accurate measurements of their product's core capabilities.

 

[DanielT]

I would say that in many cases it does not only include liking and taste in terms of the sound itself. Just look at what some people are willing to pay for pretty lousy, receivers from the 70's. Their main driving force seems to be to fix that vintage 70's look.

There were of course both good and bad amplifiers / receivers in the 70's. I'm talking about the rather in my ears lousy ones that are now being sold for ridiculous amount of money.

I do not think I will get any response to what I just wrote from someone who buys most for the sake of appearance. They are probably not on this forum.

 

[Doodski]

Note there were of course both good and bad amplifiers / receivers in the 70's. I'm talking about the rather lousy ones that are now being sold for, in my eyes, a ridiculous amount of money.

I agree. The premise of many sellers now is that if it has a long large radio tuning display and it comes from the 70's that it is worth ~$1000.00+ and must be recapped or has already been for several hundred dollars. I see it every time that I surf Kijiji, US Audio Mart and Canuck Audio Mart.

 

[DanielT]

I agree. The premise of many sellers now is that if it has a long large radio tuning display and it comes from the 70's that it is worth ~$1000.00+ and must be recapped or has already been for several hundred dollars. I see it every time that I surf Kijiji, US Audio Mart and Canuck Audio Mart.

Slightly insane.

Better then to buy something cheaper. Attaches some pictures of my mother's receiver I bought a while ago. $ 40. Disassembled it and checked so it was not too dusty . I used some canned compressed air and blew away dust .Just honk and drive with it. My old mom thinks it sounds good and it works fine

https://www.hifigoteborg.se/Luxor 5082 R spec.htm

 

[Doodski]

Slightly insane.

Better then to buy something cheaper. Attaches some pictures of my mother's receiver I bought a while ago. $ 40. Disassembled it and checked so it was not too dusty . I used some canned compressed air and blew away dust .Just honk and drive with it. My old mom thinks it sounds good and it works fine

https://www.hifigoteborg.se/Luxor 5082 R spec.htm

That unit has pretty decent capacitance for a STK amp IC and a large'ish heatsink too.

 

[Mart68]

I would love to see the proof for that. Otherwise, it's just a statement of faith.

How can it be proven? It's not a mathematical theorem.

This is hi-fi we're talking about, not quantum physics. We're varying a voltage to energise a magnet. It's not even rocket science. The chance of there being anything happening in that process that cannot be currently quantified is so small it's not worth considering.

Obviously psychoacoustics is a different matter.

 

[Doodski]

This is hi-fi we're talking about, not quantum physics.

If think electronics is about quantum mechanics and not classical physics. Perhaps a physicist like @watchnerd could chime in and settle this question.

 

[symphara]

How can it be proven? It's not a mathematical theorem.

This is hi-fi we're talking about, not quantum physics. We're varying a voltage to energise a magnet. It's not even rocket science. The chance of there being anything happening in that process that cannot be currently quantified is so small it's not worth considering.

Obviously psychoacoustics is a different matter.

It can be expressed as a mathematical theorem, for sure. Then if you believe it’s true, offer proof.

Varying a voltage to energize said magnet. Which moves a surface that moves, ripples and vibrates in some complex way (no membrane is perfectly rigid). Which interacts with an enclosure which isn’t perfectly rigid either. And moves a fluid about, and fluid mechanics are a whole box of fun. Repeat for different drivers with different currents. This fluid then interacts with an extremely complex environment filled with various surfaces of different characteristics (your room). Then we finally get to psychoacoustics.

But you can measure everything, sure. It’s like blowing a hair drier on an airplane wing and assuming you know precisely what will happen in every case of turbulence.

For the time being, I haven’t even seen a mathematical representation of an amplifier’s function that’s also empirically proven, and this is a far less messy device than a speaker.

 

[Frgirard]

But you can measure everything, sure. It’s like blowing a hair drier on an airplane wing and assuming you know precisely what will happen in every case of turbulence.

It's time for you to enter in the age of the modernity.
The simulation by software are made to test your airplane: Esterel technologies.
JMR has designed the first Offrand speaker generation with CAD software.
When they listen the first model, the Offrand sound as they thought so.

 

[symphara]

It's time for you to enter in the age of the modernity.
The simulation by software are made to test your airplane.
JMR has designed the first Offrand speaker generation with CAD software.
When they listen the first model, the Offrand sound as they thought so.

But those simulations for airplanes have behind solid mathematics and by comparison huge (many orders of magnitude higher) resources and instrumentation. And sometimes they still mess up.

Just because you simulate something doesn't mean that your simulation is realistic.

 

[tomtoo]

But those simulations for airplanes have behind solid mathematics and by comparison huge (many orders of magnitude higher) resources and instrumentation. And sometimes they still mess up.

Just because you simulate something doesn't mean that your simulation is realistic.

Yes, but much better than pure estimations. Thats why they so usefull. Its like boosting your brain with billions of pocket calculators.

 

[ahofer]

View attachment 152926

View attachment 152927

This is exactly how my wife and I dress when we are sitting around on the floor listening to music.

 

[Frgirard]

But those simulations for airplanes have behind solid mathematics and by comparison huge (many orders of magnitude higher) resources and instrumentation. And sometimes they still mess up.

Just because you simulate something doesn't mean that your simulation is realistic.

The simulation is realistic whether you like it or not.

 

[symphara]

Yes, but much better than pure estimations. Thats why they so usefull. Its like boosting your brain with billions of pocket calculators.

I never said it's not useful. I mainly remarked on my personal experience - these measurements just aren't that useful, because they don't correlate with how I perceive a speaker.

Using these measurements as a lodestar to choosing a new speaker, without personally hearing it, and ignoring many others - particularly since there's an absolute wealth of speakers without ASR measurements out there - seems like missing the forest because you concentrate on a couple of trees that you think are "better" because someone determined (precisely) they have more symmetrical rings.

 

[tomtoo]

I never said it's not useful. I mainly remarked on my personal experience - these measurements just aren't that useful, because they don't correlate with how I perceive a speaker.

Using these measurements as a lodestar to choosing a new speaker, without personally hearing it, and ignoring many others - particularly since there's an absolute wealth of speakers without ASR measurements out there - seems like missing the forest because you concentrate on a couple of trees that you think are "better" because someone determined (precisely) they have more symmetrical rings.

Dont get you, you have the measurements. You have to corrolate to what you like.
If you have problems with that, dont blame the , measurements.

 

[symphara]

Dont get you, you have the measurements. You have to corrolate to what you like.
If you have problems with that, dont blame the , measurements.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[tomtoo]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

"...these measurements just aren't that useful, because they don't correlate with how I perceive a speaker..."

This measuerments correlate to 80% of the people. Not to you, no problem.
Take the measurements, and look for deviations that you enjoy more, lets say 5db up at 1kHz.