• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Amir recommendation criticism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
9
Likes
15
#21
Measurements can't explain how something sounds. That's why the listening impressions are important.
The whole point of this forum is to use measurements to explain how something sounds. The "science" part of audiosciencereview would dictate that if the theory doesn't match the observation then the theory may need some tweaking or to be changed altogether.

I'd be interested to see if two speakers measure similarly if the listening impressions are significantly different.
 
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
39
Likes
41
#22
The whole point of this forum is to use measurements to explain how something sounds. The "science" part of audiosciencereview would dictate that if the theory doesn't match the observation then the theory may need some tweaking or to be changed altogether.

I'd be interested to see if two speakers measure similarly if the listening impressions are significantly different.
I would tweak your first sentence to say the point of this site is to add reliable, repeatable objectivity to the subjectivity of reviews, which are often little more than marketing vehicles.

We all know that our own applications are different. Rooms and treatments are key components of the listening experience, as are the particular equipment in the signal chain. Measurements cannot completely account for how the elements of a complex system interact.

I appreciate this site for the objective input, but my ears often do not follow the science. For example, the aforementioned LS50s do not score comparatively well in Amir's tests, nor did he subjectively like them, but they sound great TO ME in my particular environment. Another example is the Khadas ToneBoard DAC. It scores very well, but I PREFER the sound of the lesser scoring Modi 3 DAC in my headphone setup.

It is important to understand that Amir's listening impressions are his personal opinion formed in his environment with his ears. Your mileage may vary considerably.
 

JohnBooty

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
296
Likes
490
Location
Philadelphia area
#23
but that's because I was looking at his recommendations as a "does this product perform well relative to other products in its price range?", and that's not what it is.
You are completely correct.

Confusion is understandable because that IS what his recommendation means for everything BUT speakers.
 
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
39
Likes
41
#25
I don't think you can hear any difference.
Think whatever you like; it matters not to me.

I took them both to work, where I listen to decent headphones on a JDS Labs Atom amp most of the day. With the Modi 3, I listened all day with no fatigue. With the Khadas, I was done by 2PM. I switched back and forth for nearly a month, and the result was always the same. There was no bias, as I did not care which one I kept. They were the same price and performed the same function. I had a clear preference for the Modi.
 
Last edited:

oldsysop

Active Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2019
Messages
231
Likes
345
#26
I took them both to work, where I listen to decent headphones on a JDS Labs Atom amp most of the day. With the Modi 3, I listened all day with no fatigue. With the Khadas, I was done by 2PM. I switched back and forth for nearly a month, and the result was always the same. There was no bias, as I did not care which one I kept. They were the same price and performed the same function. I had a clear preference for the Modi.
The methodology used confirms my opinion.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
96
Likes
99
#29
Personally I actually feel more EQ(ie: room correction) should be used with every speaker for listening tests, but there are various opinions of that. Regardless, there's too many variables involved to just boil it down to recommended or not. Recommended for what, where, multichannel, stereo, size of room, directivity preference? Etc.
I totally agree. It would be especially useful for readers who are totally fine with messing with eq and want to grasp what niggles there are that eq can't fix.
 

AudioJester

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
154
Likes
159
#30
My 2 cents. I use the measurements as a guide. My listening preferences seem very different Amir and I recognise that.
He likes loud and a downward tilt. I listen in a multipurpose room with others at home - much lower level than reference and hence I prefer a flatter curve.
I can now pick speakers I will likely appreciate from the measurements.
I can also load a downward tilt dsp profile for when I want loud - something else I learnt here!
I do not value any subjective impressions without measurements any more.
 
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
39
Likes
41
#31
Double-blind test with instrument level matching is the way to do it.
Sure. That is the ultimate in objectivity. I am a former chemist and current software engineer, so I understand scientific principles very well.

But... I'd say a month of listening to all kinds of music--with many daily volume adjustments from program to program, without caring which DAC was in the chain, and always noting the Khadas was in the chain, when I experienced fatigue--was easily telling enough to make a competent decision and determine a clear preference. The real world isn't perfect. We use the inputs we have. The Khadas was always in the circuit, when I had enough and took off the headphones early. Every single time.

IMHO YMMV
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2019
Messages
70
Likes
32
Location
Perth, Western Australia
#32
Just look at the fans supporting Schiit products you would know how little subjective preference matters.
 

Music1969

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Messages
1,043
Likes
325
#33
1k$ Kef with 5.0 not recommended and I saw that Amir did not like the best passive speaker in this list the R3.
It's US$2k per pair for the R3.

And his R3 review concluded with "objective measurements are superb enough to give a thumbs up to KEF R3 and hence the choice of panther."

I'm pretty sure the KEF engineers involved with the R3 are very happy reading his review...
 

QMuse

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
3,046
Likes
2,396
#35
The issue with the R3 was that there was a room mode that needed to be EQed for them to sound good.
We never saw a proof of that. To correct room modes you need to make in-room measurement from your LP (preferably with MMM so it is spatialy averaged), then you design a filter based on that and you measure again to verify that modes have been corrected. You don't just slap a single filter at XX Hz saying "there, I fixed a room mode".
 

Sancus

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
748
Likes
1,490
#36
We never saw a proof of that. To correct room modes you need to make in-room measurement from your LP (preferably with MMM so it is spatialy averaged), then you design a filter based on that and you measure again to verify that modes ghave been corrected. You don't just slap a single filter at XX Hz saying "there, I fixed a room mode".
? What kind of proof were you expecting? It's all just subjective listening tests. Amir said it was a room mode at the end of the F35 review, I believe his statement, all there is to it. There is no point in trying to second guess his EQ and listening tests, take them at face value or ignore them imo.

Honestly it seems like you look for stuff to nitpick constantly.
 

QMuse

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
3,046
Likes
2,396
#37
? What kind of proof were you expecting? It's all just subjective listening tests. Amir said it was a room mode at the end of the F35 review, I believe his statement, all there is to it. There is no point in trying to second guess his EQ and listening tests, take them at face value or ignore them imo.

Honestly it seems like you look for stuff to nitpick constantly.
You said "the issue with R3 was that there was a room mode that needed to be EQed for them to sound good ", but we never saw a proof of that. Amir added a single filter and announced that he fixed room modes in his room at the LP he is using for listening tests.

I expected a room measurement to identify room modes and another room measurement to verify that room EQ filters did a good job correcting them. That is a way to do room EQ, not just slapping a single filter selected by your ears.

I have done plenty of room corrections in many rooms and with many speakers, but I have yet to see a room which modes can be corrected with a single filter. And for the things to be even better, sometimes that filter is applied and sometimes it isn't, like in listening test of Vanatoo speker.

Honestly it seems like you look for stuff to nitpick constantly.
Pls stay civilised and refrain yourself from giving personal qualifications.
 
Last edited:

Objectivist01

Active Member
Joined
May 24, 2020
Messages
213
Likes
59
#38
According to WhatHIFI the R3 is one of the best speaker they have ever heard so the recommendation should be on score, no?
A lot of people love the LS50 (I don't have them) so why would you not recommend them?
Personal opinions are problematic and it is a bit confusing because it contradict the scores.
This forums goal is to appreciate engineering which has no nonsense getting in way of transparency. R3 is a technically superior speaker, it’s much less colored speaker than LS50. Here we have only one reference point - transparency at the best. What Hi-Fi on the other hand has several reference points for popular coloring on sounds and reference grade stuff. So for them, they can give 5 stars on a colored product too. But here we cannot. Imo, colored sound is most of the times due to the fact that the company’s lack of effort into those speakers. The companies think at this point, let’s release a product, it’s not all that bad though not upto the reference point. Some folks who don’t care about the almost accuracy may like it as it’s fun to listen to it at this point. Let’s keep the price gap huge so that they may choose to buy this a a good compromise. I don’t think no real engineer would be happy in developing such a product which questions their own talents but then there is a market !
 

tecnogadget

Active Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
231
Likes
390
Location
Madrid, Spain
#39
Amir did recommend the R3 based on the strength of its measurements alone. He also came back and did a bit of EQ'ing on the R3 and liked them better on his subjective listening. Based on Amir's review of the R3, I bought a pair and am thoroughly enjoying them.
Yes indeed, an users who are very active are aware of this subjective impression follow up...but most newcomers won’t dig into 30 pages threads.

@st379 It’s just Amir’s opinion, you have to respect his subjective preference even if you disagree, that’s how the world works. He never states “hey I’m god and my recommendation goes to church”.
This is 1 man opinion and you can make it as big or as little as you wish.
But then Amir has a long road on this, several years of experience and fair share of good speakers listening, this are attributes that many people would appreciate and like to know his subjective impression.
If you don’t agree with them you can skip them at all and form your own opinion, I’m sure Amir won’t take offense on that.

@Amir is it possible to add the room mode EQ FIX to the main post ? This could prevent future rants. I think the review as a whole ended up a little bit unbalanced given the measurements were good and the second nd time you listened to them you also thought they were good.
Not a lot of people will dig the whole thread or find the fix into the Revel F208 thread.Cheers
 
OP
S
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
19
Likes
9
Thread Starter #40
It's US$2k per pair for the R3.

And his R3 review concluded with "objective measurements are superb enough to give a thumbs up to KEF R3 and hence the choice of panther."

I'm pretty sure the KEF engineers involved with the R3 are very happy reading his review...
I talked about the q100, it has a 5.0.

Anyway now I understnad that it is mostly subjective and only the R3 got a recommendation based on measurements.
Most of the time it seems like it is based solely on Amir taste and it is fine, I was just a little bit confused because he does mention the measurements in his final conclusion but he seems to ignore them most of the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top Bottom