Amir vs. Abyss: The Battle We Need

[JohnBooty]

Namely, I find it hard to believe that so many people spend tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars, after listening to multiple systems, and still haven't been able to collectively figure out a basic truth that diminishing return happens around $200.

Like you said, this hobby has been going for decades. And we still haven't figured this out? A super obvious truth that Amir is showing us right in our faces?

Yeah these are good points/questions.

First, it has been known for many decades at least in professional circles. For example look at the work George Lucas did to standardize, calibrate, and certify cinema sound way back when. He knew that was the way for his movies to sound the best to the most people in the widest range of theaters. He was far from the first on the pro side obviously, but I think his work on the THX standard is a big part of why standardized performance began to make its way into consumer tech.

As for why audio hasn't been sold to consumers this way? Chief factors IMO:

1. In previous decades, up through the 1980s/1990s perhaps, the stereo system in your living room (much as the car in your driveway) was a "status symbol" as much as something you bought for status as much as objective performance.

2. Before measurements like those seen at ASR were democratized, unless you were a studio engineer with access to accurate reference equipment, you had no way to judge whether the hifi system you bought at the mall was objectively accurate. As opposed to a television where you'd easily notice if the colors of skin tones and everyday common household objects were off.

3. The audiophile press was caught in an absolutely toxic snake-oil cycle. The magazines relied upon advertising dollars from companies peddling high-margin snake oil. As a matter of survival they were unable and unwilling to refute a lot of BS and "lay down the law" in a factual way.

4. As we see from ASR's work, the measurements that largely define objective performance are a bit complex and require technical understanding. Frankly somebody browsing bluetooth boom boxes at Wal-Mart isn't gonna know or care about interpreting that stuff.

5. Audio makers can't hype objective performance too much. Because what if somebody offers better objective performance for less money? Why should anybody buy your brand then? Besides, objective performance measurements can be gamed to an extent, at least in isolation. ex: "power output" ratings for amps.

And I'm not talking about magic. I'm talking about measurable stuff we're not measuring, or that might be difficult/impossible to measure currently.

My opinion is "yes." Though I think a lot of it boils down to stuff we can already measure but haven't perfectly correlated to enjoyment yet. The ability of the playback chain to handle massive transients/dynamics is something we haven't really... nailed down, IMO. On the amplifier side we're talking slew rate and damping factor, not exactly new concepts. But I think they're under represented/measured. I think this is related to detestable subjective audiophile terms like "speed" and "slam"... maybe.

This is exactly the type of comparison I'm worried about with this forum. There are experiences in driving a $200,000 car vs. driving a $20,000 car. How the car smells. How stable it feels. How it feels when shifting. Etc.

Not exactly what you're talking about but FWIW objectivists do recognize the value of creature comforts like form factor, build quality, the feel of the controls, etc!

My [ridiculously expensive watch] tells time with slam and PRaT, far more than the [slightly less expensive last year’s model] It’s almost as if it allows the essence of time to emerge, with all its component dimensions intact. Highly recommended.

A Rolex and a Casio will give you the exact same information.

Thanks to the miracle of quartz, this isn't true!

The Casio will be more accurate than any Rolex.

(Except for those quartz models Rolex sold briefly and would like you to forget...)

 

[boselover61]

No, I'm on the side of thinking the human brain is strange, and that there are all sorts of nuances and biases that affect the perception of sound.

If you walk into one system in a room, and it blows you away, and you walk into a room next door and are underwhelmed (and everyone else feels the same), what happens when there are more expensive components in the first room?

Or let me ask this another way. Are we saying there isn't much point in optimizing all this stuff? That everything prettty much sounds the same after around $200?

So we should spend all our money on a $200 dollar DAC and the rest in good active speakers? And this will equal or be better than a $50K DAC/Upsampler connected to $50K in preamp/amp gear connected to similarly-sized speakers?

Is that the claim? If so I'm so glad I found this place before buying my preamp and amp!

I've literally never experienced this phenomenon you listed so I can't comment on that. What you are describing in which 1 system sounds worse than the other could be due to room treatment. One room could be treated worse than the others. I've been to many conventions in the US and in JBL Vietnam when they had a grand opening last year? I listened to one room with JBL HDI 1600, the other room with JBL Studio 630. I immediately could tell the difference in that the Studio 630 was much brigher than the HDI 1600. The JBL rep told me the 630 series was made for the Asian market and it's been determined that they prefer a brighter sound signature and that's why they tuned the 630 to be bright. Now if you ask me which speakers better? I can tell you right now, the HDI 1600 is better and it's more expensive. But let's look at better here. The HDI 1600 costed almost 2 times the Studio 630 but the only difference I could tell was the elevated treble. Everything sounded the same? So I came to the conclusion that they are just 2 differently tuned speaker. I didn't get "underwhelmed", I just hear differences and most people there in the same room agreed with me that one speaker was more bright than the others and they couldn't tell the difference otherwise.

To your question, there's no point in optimizing for the speakers above a certain price point imo. Should just probably spend all that extra money on EQing out your room and any problem your room might have. If I saw the measurements beforehand I could've tell you how they sound even before listening to them. I didn't like either of them because guess what? The rooms were treated very badly. Loud noises, acoustic problems, echos and bunch of people commenting over while the music's being played. In fact I preferred the cheaper 630 because of how they are tuned I can hear the voice from the audio track clearer while a bunch of people were talking over it. So in this situation the HDI 1600 (the expensive speakers by almost double the price) got beat out by the cheaper 630. What does this tells me? We need to spend almost as much money on room treatment rather than just blindly buying the most expensive speakers out there.

 

[danielmiessler]

What does this tell me? We need to spend almost as much money on room treatment rather than just blindly buying the most expensive speakers out there.

Interesting. Thank you.

 

[JohnBooty]

What does this tells me? We need to spend almost as much money on room treatment rather than just blindly buying the most expensive speakers out there.

Interesting. Thank you.

I'm just going to point out for the benefit of our new member that this is far from a universal opinion even among objectivists. It's indisputable that the room influences sound, but the need for extensive room treatment is... let's call it an open question. It's worth noting the minimal treatment in the home of Dr. Floyd Toole, who literally wrote the book (or at least, a book) on the matter.

 

[danielmiessler]

Sock. Puppet.

This is super disappointing to hear, this first day in the forum. It should be easy to see from my comments that I'm being genuine here.

 

[Music1969]

SO. HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS HAPPEN?

I would say a great first step is for you to send your AB 1266 TC headphones in to Amir for measurements...

 

[boselover61]

I'm just going to point out for the benefit of our new member that this is far from a universal opinion even among objectivists. It's indisputable that the room influences sound, but the need for extensive room treatment is... let's call it an open question. It's worth noting the minimal treatment in the home of Dr. Floyd Toole, who literally wrote the book (or at least, a book) on the matter.

Well his room is even treatee minimally is way more well treated than mine. I cant even put my setup toward a specific location thats front viewing. I had to stuff them in a corner because the only big space is blocked by a fireplace. I would need to carve a big hole abovd the fireplace to out my tv there to have the same setup as dr toole

 

[Doodski]

For a DAC something along the lines of this RME would be a nice addition. Including a parametric EQ, remote control plus many other useful features and it tests very well. The savings can be budgeted elsewhere where they will make a difference.

 

[Linus]

This is exactly the type of comparison I'm worried about with this forum. There are experiences in driving a $200,000 car vs. driving a $20,000 car. How the car smells. How stable it feels. How it feels when shifting. Etc.

If we were to measure with a checkbox, "Did the Porsche get you to point A?, and did the Kia get you to point A?", then they would both be "equal".

Is it possible that the same sorts of measurement misses are happening here? I'm not being rhetorical. I'm asking.

Like introducing types of flaws that improve experience in the music? Warmth, liveliness, etc. Like Je Ne Se Qoi type stuff.

And I'm not talking about magic. I'm talking about measurable stuff we're not measuring, or that might be difficult/impossible to measure currently.

This car analogy worries me that it could be the case.

The car analogy is more about who will get to the supermarket first.
I totally agree some cars are nicer to drive than others. It’s also probably nicer to play around with fancy audio equipment, but will it sound better?!

If you’re all about sound quality, a RME ADI-2 and a pair of Genelec will make a hard to beat sound system. You’ll even get that fancy European feel Add room treatment and your set. Not really impressive to look at, but it sounds pretty good.

 

[Coach_Kaarlo]

I was after some evidence of your findings. If you'd like to share this then great. I'm sceptical but interested. Do you have any evidence? Testing methodology? Conditions? I'm not really interested in your analysis of my motivations, just your conclusions and whether or not they stand up to external analysis.

I am sorry, but you continue to make my point, and I do not want to make you feel defensive by examining your motivations. Apologies if I did so, but this next bit may really make you uncomfortable. My motives for continuing this exchange are simply to highlight exactly what I was trying to explain.

You instantly responded in the ASR standard way - double blind or abx or peer review - then no more debate (thinking) is possible unless these criteria are met, and everything I say which follows can easily be discounted or ignored or mocked.

How did you determine that I was being genuine with the example about the amps? Rather than just using the example in the making of a point!? What I mean is that you read my post then had a thought, then posted your response, but the basis for your whole post is built on the idea that my testing was subjective and flawed. At no point did you see the example I used in the context of the idea I was trying to communicate about dogma. In other words regardless of an opportunity to think critically, the bits that resonated with you were the flaws in my example and the need to set me straight.

Now I did not saying either way what my motivations were for using that example in my first post - but you had already decided - and continued despite the opportunity to rethink!

 

[danielmiessler]

RME ADI-2 and a pair of Genelec.

Interesting. Which ones?

 

[HiFidFan]

Interesting. Which ones?

The ones that say Neumann 310

 

[Easternlethal]

This is super disappointing to hear, this first day in the forum. It should be easy to see from my comments that I'm being genuine here.

don't worry - the same thing happened to me with my first post also, which coincidentally is on a similar topic.

 

[JSmith]

Abyss: But I can hear a difference.

So measure the speaker output from a specific position using specific frequencies, swap the cables and perform the same measurement. If the waveforms coming out of the speaker are identical, then no one heard anything different... if the speaker output differs then investigate why. Otherwise it's down the rabbit hole unfortunately.



JSmith

 

[rkbates]

Just a thought on measurements - just about everything relies on a microphone for recording. If it can be detected by a microphone, there's ultimately some movement in electrons so it can be measured. Doing the measurements accurately, understanding the errors, and interpreting the measurements is where the skill/magic lies. So if you use measurements to cull all the rubbish, then you get to the fun part of choosing between features, looks, brand, sound etc in your decisions. Virtually impossible to do in limited time in a showroom deliberately designed to make item x the most appealing. Once you get through all that the quality of recording and your mood become the biggest variables. Good luck measuring them.

 

[617]

Interesting. Which ones?

8361 coaxial / cardiod are amongst the most technologically advanced speakers being made today. Their dispersion is incredibly smooth. They sell a matched subwoofer stand for them.

I design and measure speakers for fun, and the latest generation of designs from Genelec and Dutch and Dutch have kind of put that hobby to bed for the moment. Making a traditional audiophile speaker like Wilson or Sonus Faber or Focal or whatever is not too difficult, but what Genelec and D+D are doing with these cardiod designs is game changing.

In a nutshell, the most important issue in loudspeaker engineering is the narrowness and smoothness of the off axis response. Revel and a few other passive speakers have perfected the smoothness; their 3 and 4 way designs are about as good as you can get with a traditional box speaker. Then, people started making speakers with response that is both smooth and narrow, like Gedlee or Danley and some others. These speakers avoid early reflections, and sound incredibly natural and articulate, but come at a size disadvantage. The cardiod designs from Genelec and D+D have off axis response that is both narrow, to avoid near reflections, smooth, so the later reflections sound like the direct sound, but do so in a reasonably small form factor. It cannot be overstated how big a deal this is to speaker designers.

There are some other speakers which accomplish some of these goals; the big Bang and Olufsens, ME Geithain as well. These next generation speakers work with your room and don't need idiotic, treble sucking 'room treatment'. You may or may not like them, but if you want the best, you need to hear them.

 

[pierre]

Interesting. Which ones?

If you have a large room: Genelec 8361 on top of W371 x2 + 1 subwoofer likely 7380.
If not, decrease the size. Genelec has a good guide https://www.genelec.com/high-end-listening

 

[JohnBooty]

Here is how I imagine that sit-down playing out

Amir: Here is all of the scientific evidence that expensive cables do not improve sound quality.
Abyss: But I can hear a difference.

Repeat for 45 minutes.

It would be like one of those debates where two dudes debate abortion or evolution or something.

It's generally a bit worse than useless because it changes nobody's mind and more likely than not contributes to tribalism, as each side beats their chest afterwards like gorillas, filled with pride that "their" guy "won."

Meanwhile, folks who view such a thing with an open mind (if any actually exist) will generally be swayed by whichever presenter is more charismatic. Because, after all, neophytes on the subject matter can't accurately judge the discourse because they simply don't have the knowledge to evaluate to properly evaluate the points and counterpoints.

 

[Linus]

Interesting. Which ones?

it’s really up to what your room looks like.
I highly suggest you go spend an afternoon at a dealer and just have fun listening to all kind of music.

 

[Racheski]

Ok since the OP seems genuine, an Intelligence Squared debate between Subjectivists and Objectivists would be pretty cool to gain more exposure in the public domain. Amir, Sean Olive, & Floyd Toole vs. Paul Mcgowan, a rep from Audioquest, & a rep from Abyss. How would be the topic of debate be framed? Something like, Measurements predict sound quality better than our ears.

Loser walks the plank.