D
Deleted member 30699
Guest
The following is a review of AudioScienceReview (ASR) as if it were a concept submitted to a journal.
In science, the peer-review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work. It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
This review is single-blind (reviewer is anonymous, author/work is not), which is the current trend in science.
Process:
Peer reviews typically have a rating section, and feedback to author/editor section.
This review is provided s.t. a potentially revised ASR can be even better.
Review rating:
Rating 4/5 for electronic components
Rating 2/5 for speakers
Rating 3/5 for other equipment
Review feedback:
ASR has the potential to bring objective information to audio end-users. This is information is needed because audio equipment is increasingly sold online, i.e. potential customers cannot audition, and home-trails are more cumbersome. ASR provides two types of results: objective measurements and subjective feedback (listening tests or preference score).
This review holds ASR to a high standard than any other review outlet because of its claim of objectivity.
Electronic components:
The author provides key metrics and a comprehensive objective evaluation of electronic components. Analysis is provided predominantly in the frequency domain. This is state-of-the-art in audio and appropriate for this purpose. However, modern systems and control theory has moved to time domain analysis since it has advantages in the description of nonlinear, multi-input-multi-output, and constraint systems. Lack of understanding thereof may have contributed to some unfortunate statements, e.g. that phase may not matter in (
). There are several issues with the video, where ASR discards that phase shift is relevant, the main ones are
- Low/no phase shifts result in a output that is measurably better, hence higher fidelity
- Phase shift is a frequency-dependent time delay (or advance). This is audible especially at low frequencies. Also, random phase shifts (without changing the magnitude) can model certain distortions.
- The author himself acknowledges that (differential) phase shift is audible. Hence the manufacturers claim of audibility are satisfied and the burden of proof is on the author.
- Science is about finding the "truth" and models are always in question. This is especially true when the main references are 40-50 years old and human listening preferences change over time (e.g. increased bass in music).
Speakers:
ASR provides speaker measurements based on a nearfield technique. This is a good approximation to anecoic measurements and can extrapolate a in-room response based on assumptions of a room. Furthermore, ASR provides listening tests. The objective information is overall very good. However, there are some issues
(1) The author owns Revel Saloon speakers, possibly for his preference of these speakers over others. Hence, listening tests may have an unintentional bias toward this sound signature. However, listening tests are also always differential (humans are adaptive and we tend to bias towards what we are used to). Hence, speakers may also be unintentionally benchmarked against this sound. Overall, this may result in a preference for Reven speakers (or Harman products in general).
(2) In science, independence is critical and COI is a serious topic. For example, it is unacceptable to take part in a drug study and have any financial interests in the drug sales or company producing the drug. A scientist would need to excuse her/himself from such a study or at the very least refrain from making subjective claims.
(3) Not every speaker concept adheres to the underlying theory including panel speakers (Magnepan), dipole speakers, or omnidirectional speakers (Ohm, Linkwitz). These speakers, usually, intend to leverage the room and can achieve different things (including being more problematic in some rooms). However, such speakers should not be judged using the same concepts.
Other equipment:
ASR also reviews cables and power conditioners. Overall, ASR carries the message that these things don't matter, which is usually correct. However, ASR fails to educate how these things can matter.
Cables for example can matter if terminals (or wire connecting to terminals) oxidize and become less conductive, which is quite common.
Power conditioners can matter if the local grid has issues, power cables are close to mic/phono cables (typically before preamp), or in presence of old equipment (typically designed before the existence of switched power supplies). Usually, this should not be a relevant for most modern systems
Summary:
ASR is a very interesting concept with some rough edges to address.
In science, the peer-review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work. It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
This review is single-blind (reviewer is anonymous, author/work is not), which is the current trend in science.
Process:
Peer reviews typically have a rating section, and feedback to author/editor section.
This review is provided s.t. a potentially revised ASR can be even better.
Review rating:
Rating 4/5 for electronic components
Rating 2/5 for speakers
Rating 3/5 for other equipment
Review feedback:
ASR has the potential to bring objective information to audio end-users. This is information is needed because audio equipment is increasingly sold online, i.e. potential customers cannot audition, and home-trails are more cumbersome. ASR provides two types of results: objective measurements and subjective feedback (listening tests or preference score).
This review holds ASR to a high standard than any other review outlet because of its claim of objectivity.
Electronic components:
The author provides key metrics and a comprehensive objective evaluation of electronic components. Analysis is provided predominantly in the frequency domain. This is state-of-the-art in audio and appropriate for this purpose. However, modern systems and control theory has moved to time domain analysis since it has advantages in the description of nonlinear, multi-input-multi-output, and constraint systems. Lack of understanding thereof may have contributed to some unfortunate statements, e.g. that phase may not matter in (
- Low/no phase shifts result in a output that is measurably better, hence higher fidelity
- Phase shift is a frequency-dependent time delay (or advance). This is audible especially at low frequencies. Also, random phase shifts (without changing the magnitude) can model certain distortions.
- The author himself acknowledges that (differential) phase shift is audible. Hence the manufacturers claim of audibility are satisfied and the burden of proof is on the author.
- Science is about finding the "truth" and models are always in question. This is especially true when the main references are 40-50 years old and human listening preferences change over time (e.g. increased bass in music).
Speakers:
ASR provides speaker measurements based on a nearfield technique. This is a good approximation to anecoic measurements and can extrapolate a in-room response based on assumptions of a room. Furthermore, ASR provides listening tests. The objective information is overall very good. However, there are some issues
(1) The author owns Revel Saloon speakers, possibly for his preference of these speakers over others. Hence, listening tests may have an unintentional bias toward this sound signature. However, listening tests are also always differential (humans are adaptive and we tend to bias towards what we are used to). Hence, speakers may also be unintentionally benchmarked against this sound. Overall, this may result in a preference for Reven speakers (or Harman products in general).
(2) In science, independence is critical and COI is a serious topic. For example, it is unacceptable to take part in a drug study and have any financial interests in the drug sales or company producing the drug. A scientist would need to excuse her/himself from such a study or at the very least refrain from making subjective claims.
(3) Not every speaker concept adheres to the underlying theory including panel speakers (Magnepan), dipole speakers, or omnidirectional speakers (Ohm, Linkwitz). These speakers, usually, intend to leverage the room and can achieve different things (including being more problematic in some rooms). However, such speakers should not be judged using the same concepts.
Other equipment:
ASR also reviews cables and power conditioners. Overall, ASR carries the message that these things don't matter, which is usually correct. However, ASR fails to educate how these things can matter.
Cables for example can matter if terminals (or wire connecting to terminals) oxidize and become less conductive, which is quite common.
Power conditioners can matter if the local grid has issues, power cables are close to mic/phono cables (typically before preamp), or in presence of old equipment (typically designed before the existence of switched power supplies). Usually, this should not be a relevant for most modern systems
Summary:
ASR is a very interesting concept with some rough edges to address.
Last edited by a moderator: