A Fellow Skeptic of Subjective Reviews?

[amirm]

There are some shenanigans in the industry to be sure. And some bad faith. But I’ve been aware of too many good faith actors in the business also, to make me want to become fully cynical and paint everybody with the same brush.

Once more, I had a very high opinion of Doug when he joined us. It was only through the conversations here that I realized I was mistaken. That they measurements are farmed out to NRC and that he thinks none of us are qualified to interpret them. Let me quote more of what he post here:

"The lack on commentary on many of the measurements beyond "here is what you're seeing" is deliberate. I can "read into" measurements extremely well, but I also know that there are limitations when you try to read into them too much. I've been criticized by some in the past for not providing more commentary, but that's on purpose because I don't want to give misinformation, which I think is more dangerous. One of the pitfalls of the measurements on this site, for example, is that people are reading way too much into certain measurements and making judgements that may or may not be there. I've seen many comments on speaker measurements, for example, that have me rolling my eyes -- and I've measured for 20+ years. It's easy to just say stuff -- but to be right is another story. I've never wanted to step in that far -- because I'd be more likely to mislead than inform.

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!"

No one valuing measurements would just throw out some graphs out there, only to completely ignore them in the review on purpose! And then claiming even he is not qualified to interpret them. So who is? The poor audiophile?

And notice how he claims to have measured speakers for 20+ years. He has not. All speaker measurements are performed by NRC, not him. He ships the speaker to them, they test and generate a report. He sends them a check. His only goal in saying what you quoted from him is to defend that expense (as a necessary evil).

 

[kyuu]

"The lack on commentary on many of the measurements beyond "here is what you're seeing" is deliberate. I can "read into" measurements extremely well, but I also know that there are limitations when you try to read into them too much. I've been criticized by some in the past for not providing more commentary, but that's on purpose because I don't want to give misinformation, which I think is more dangerous. One of the pitfalls of the measurements on this site, for example, is that people are reading way too much into certain measurements and making judgements that may or may not be there. I've seen many comments on speaker measurements, for example, that have me rolling my eyes -- and I've measured for 20+ years. It's easy to just say stuff -- but to be right is another story. I've never wanted to step in that far -- because I'd be more likely to mislead than inform.

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!"

That's such a transparent cop-out. It's "dangerous" to read into measurements, but reporting your sighted listening impressions as useful and informative (while using such eye-rolling tropes as "compares favorably to speakers above its price bracket" but "the treble is unrefined" compared to more expensive speakers of course) is not dangerous and does not misinform? Gimme a break.

 

[pablolie]

I'll add to this discussion from a different perspective. As a consumer, and what all these discussions provide me useful info about. I love listening to music, and the vehicle to accomplish that is through equipment. I was lucky inasmuch as, when I started to spend my own $ (or Deutsch Mark at the time) on audio equipment, German audio magazines provided basic measurements (I am sure measurement equipment was not as evolved or accessible), along with the usual creative writing. And I have never been a compulsory equipment swapper.

Right now, I love my setup, and it consists of equipment (integrated amp and speakers) that were not recommended in ASR, yet to my eyes measured plenty well (in fact close to class leading) in the categories that matter to my listening style. THAT is the big takeaway with measurements to me - you have to learn to interpret them for yourself and your own preferences. Not all the way down to 20Hz...? Not a problem for me. Not able to go distortion-less at 114dB? Fine by me, too. Etc etc.

To me, the reductionist attempt at "it's all about measurements" or (meaning XOR mutual exclusivity) "it's about listening impressions by trained ears" is a useless battle. I just don't think it captures the magic triangle between measurements, in-room behavior and personal preference. And anyone that claims their ears or listening habits or musical preferences are a reference I should slavishly accept is delusional.

What matters to me is the equipment was capably designed, integrates into my listening shrine room, isn't an eyesore, and helps me just chill immersing myself into Bill Evans or Joe Henderson or Herbert von Karajan and his Berliners.

Both measurements and flowery-worded listening tests may have the same ability to misguide you into unnecessary equipment upgrades, albeit for different reasons.

 

[Curvature]

That's such a transparent cop-out. ... Gimme a break.

Made me actually laugh out loud.

reductionist attempt at "it's all about measurements"

Does anyone actually hold this position? I really doubt it.

the magic triangle between measurements, in-room behavior and personal preference

IMO, this is the definition of objectivity.

I love my setup, and it consists of equipment (integrated amp and speakers)

What do you have, if you don't mind?

 

[pablolie]

Does anyone actually hold this position? I really doubt it.

I have witnessed it, but don't feel compelled to revisit and point fingers.

What do you have, if you don't mind?

KEF LS50 Meta Review (Speaker)

i don't have the ls50's *but* i can't imagine leaving them run full range and adding a sub with the intention of high output listening... the entire idea of monitors is clarity , you lose that, full range at high volume with these... So my current setup is sort of like this - I run my sub...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Liberal Democracy]

Once more, I had a very high opinion of Doug when he joined us. It was only through the conversations here that I realized I was mistaken. That they measurements are farmed out to NRC and that he thinks none of us are qualified to interpret them. Let me quote more of what he post here:

"The lack on commentary on many of the measurements beyond "here is what you're seeing" is deliberate. I can "read into" measurements extremely well, but I also know that there are limitations when you try to read into them too much. I've been criticized by some in the past for not providing more commentary, but that's on purpose because I don't want to give misinformation, which I think is more dangerous. One of the pitfalls of the measurements on this site, for example, is that people are reading way too much into certain measurements and making judgements that may or may not be there. I've seen many comments on speaker measurements, for example, that have me rolling my eyes -- and I've measured for 20+ years. It's easy to just say stuff -- but to be right is another story. I've never wanted to step in that far -- because I'd be more likely to mislead than inform.

Doug Schneider
SoundStage!"

No one valuing measurements would just throw out some graphs out there, only to completely ignore them in the review on purpose! And then claiming even he is not qualified to interpret them. So who is? The poor audiophile?

And notice how he claims to have measured speakers for 20+ years. He has not. All speaker measurements are performed by NRC, not him. He ships the speaker to them, they test and generate a report. He sends them a check. His only goal in saying what you quoted from him is to defend that expense (as a necessary evil).

Doug has a point , tbf to him , folks can read too much into measurements. Start looking at top 10 SINAD charts and become anxious about having the best device based on that chart , Miss read graphs , miss understand hearing thresholds , , many are looking for another blanket authority to trust before they make a purchase ( thats not great ! ) .

Thats why education is so important to ASR , from the inception of ASR its been the core mission of all technically literate members . Some obviously did that better than others, we've lost a few along the way , gained others .. possibly we've lost a few important guys just recently.

Its a shame doubting Doug here didn't stick around and help educate the masses , instead he tried to erode the importance of the measurements to consumers , A pernicious act in my opinion. Ones left to speculate on his motivations for signing up ..

To my mind he's in the advertising and sales business! Hes clearly not in the helping consumer business, very different business, dont let the glossy pictures and affable tone deceive one.

Now , let's focus on ASR and the positive things we do . What we can do better and reflex on the mistakes we make . Far more constructive than giving notoriety to doubting Doug from Soundcage .

 

[Mart68]

From the KLH5 review

''The amp’s Shunyata Research E-Tron Alpha HC power cord was plugged into a Shunyata Venom PS8 power distributor, which, in turn, was plugged into one of the two dedicated outlets for my system with a Shunyata Venom HC power cord. The preamplifier was plugged into a Shunyata Hydra power conditioner with a Shunyata Alpha NR power cord. Another Alpha NR power cord plugged the Hydra into the other dedicated outlet.''

You can't be promoting this stuff and at the same time be lecturing about the importance of measurements.

Also I don't see why, if he's expert at interpreting loudspeaker measurements, that he does not do so. There's no commentary at all with the graphs and they're not referenced or even mentioned in the subjective review. None of this adds up unless you accept he's just a salesman, selling.

 

[Purité Audio]

They are all salesmen selling, everywhere ( to some extent) except here.
Keith

 

[DVinylfan]

''The amp’s Shunyata Research E-Tron Alpha HC power cord was plugged into a Shunyata Venom PS8 power distributor, which, in turn, was plugged into one of the two dedicated outlets for my system with a Shunyata Venom HC power cord. The preamplifier was plugged into a Shunyata Hydra power conditioner with a Shunyata Alpha NR power cord. Another Alpha NR power cord plugged the Hydra into the other dedicated outlet.''

Now let me get this straight..
You put the lime in the coconut, you drink 'em both together
Put the lime in the coconut, then you feel better

 

[Mart68]

They are all salesmen selling, everywhere
Keith

No problem with that, I was in sales myself but I didn't have a by night alter-ego as a consumer champion.

 

[Multicore]

First, I really enjoy threads like this. I am not interested in the reviews in question and Doug Schneider is new to me. What I like is the collaborative working out of values, purposes and methods that's going on. The relationship between measurements and other objective information and our ultimately always subjective experience of sound is complicated and very interesting. The relation itself can be studied scientifically too. Some people active at ASR accept that complexity and the intellectual consequences for how we think about science, engineering, perception and values and make the effort. I'm grateful.

To respond to a few points...

I may be known as a subjectivist by many of you, but i wouldn't push my personal taste (subjective by definition) as an objective fact (except the fact that it's my opinion).

Thank you, Waxx! The arrogance of the reviewer who dismisses the objective to tell you the more important thing, what he liked and didn't, is irksome.

I'm on the record here insisting that we are all subjectivists at the end of the day. If building audio systems based on objective information didn't work to deliver good subjective sound, we wouldn't do it.

To me, the reductionist attempt at "it's all about measurements" or (meaning XOR mutual exclusivity) "it's about listening impressions by trained ears" is a useless battle.

Curvature said:

Does anyone actually hold this position? I really doubt it.

Do people really believe these positions? I doubt it too. I think these positions are taken in dialectical discussion. It can be instructive or just fun to try them on for size. Fighting a fight is rewarding if you're winning, even if you don't really believe in it. In other words: sport.

Doug Schneider allegedly wrote:
One of the pitfalls of the measurements on this site, for example, is that people are reading way too much into certain measurements and making judgements that may or may not be there. I've seen many comments on speaker measurements, for example, that have me rolling my eyes -- and I've measured for 20+ years.

It's a rhetorical straw man all too common among the "expert" talking-head youtubers and it annoys me. If you've a criticism to make, be specific and clear so as to allow whoever you disagree with to respond. "There are lots of people who do ___ and I don't do that. That's why I'm better" doesn't cut it. Unfortunately this mode of discussion seems to function to establish sides/camps in some hypothesized disagreement and aggrandize the speaker in one of the camps. I find it a real turn off.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Doug has a point , tbf to him , folks can read too much into measurements. Start looking at top 10 SINAD charts and become anxious about having the best device based on that chart , Miss read graphs , miss understand hearing thresholds , , many are looking for another blanket authority to trust before they make a purchase ( thats not great ! ) .

Whole bunch of strawmen there. If I am looking for a dac for instance, and I see one that has top 10 sinad, and top 10 distortion and noise numbers, and top 10 flat response, and top ten everything and it's also a tenth the price of something that doesn't have top ten numbers, I know I'm getting a dac that is going to sound as good as a dac can sound - even if I know that my ears aren't capable of really delineating that difference. Does some reviewer stating that the more expensive dac has (to his magical ears) a "musicality", a "sweetness," an "airiness," a "richness" that the less expensive dac doesn't have mean anything at all? Nope. The reason to trust the measurements is because the measurement devices are very much more capable of "hearing" those things than my or any other human beings ears are.

When the subjective guys state that "measurements don't tell the whole story," what they really mean is "how can one know if a dac (or an amp, or even a speaker) has that magical sweetness, that musicality and richness of tonality, that blissful instrument separation that I crave if I don't listen with my own ears??" In other words, "How do I know if this thing has magical qualities that don't exist in reality if I can't listen with my own ears to determine if those imaginary things are there?"

 

[Sal1950]

Once more, I had a very high opinion of Doug when he joined us. It was only through the conversations here that I realized I was mistaken. That they measurements are farmed out to NRC and that he thinks none of us are qualified to interpret them. Let me quote more of what he post here:

Pay no attention to Matt.
As always he rides the fence and finds support for even the worse of the bad guys and gear here.

 

[markanini]

Overly subjective reviews are bad. I've also noted headphones.com using measurements basically as a prop to make exaggerated claims about new product releases, going as far as inventing their own metric to justify their claims, and infiltratring multiple enthusiast spaces, presenting as fellow enthusiasts, to prop up their credibility.

 

[Sal1950]

Overly subjective reviews are bad. I've also noted headphones.com using measurements basically as a prop to make exaggerated claims about new product releases, going as far as inventing their own metric to justify their claims, and infiltratring multiple enthusiast spaces, presenting as fellow enthusiasts, to prop up their credibility.

You just can't trust any review from a source that is making money from product advertisers.

 

[Mart68]

You just can't trust any review from a source that is making money from product advertisers.

Or one that's concerned about people misinterpreting loudspeaker measurements while at the same time promoting 3000 dollar power cables.

 

[krabapple]

As I said, you are selecting some quotes and arriving the least charitable interpretation possible; an interpretation that wouldn’t even make sense IF you looked at the wider set of evidence in terms of Doug’s view on measurements.

<SNIP>

Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle, is there anything you won't spin into a page-spanning comment or three??

Schneider:

• told Amir he (like all but a very select group of True Scotsmen) wasn't fit to interpret Klippel measurements
• left ASR in a huff when Amir demurred
• then talked shit online about ASR

I've always liked Soundstage! for its NRC measurements. Its subjective reviews mean nothing to me.


(I rewatched Jaws a few days ago in a theater. Hooper isn't nearly as verbose as you)

 

[krabapple]

I have witnessed it, but don't feel compelled to revisit and point fingers.

KEF LS50 Meta Review (Speaker)

i don't have the ls50's *but* i can't imagine leaving them run full range and adding a sub with the intention of high output listening... the entire idea of monitors is clarity , you lose that, full range at high volume with these... So my current setup is sort of like this - I run my sub...

audiosciencereview.com

Amir: "I am happy to recommend the KEF LS50 Meta."

 

[krabapple]

Now let me get this straight..
You put the lime in the coconut, you drink 'em both together
Put the lime in the coconut, then you feel better

my god, I was just thinking of this song on the way to work today, for no reason whatsoever. What is the universe trying to tell me?

 

[Sal1950]

my god, I was just thinking of this song on the way to work today, for no reason whatsoever.

Humm, that one must be before my time.