ASR recommendations should take price into account, and shouldn't only be based on the subjective test.

[Sharpi31]

Where exactly do you plug the ethernet cable in a gopher? I hope PETA never finds out.

Probably best to avoid PoE……..

 

[Vict0r]

Probably best to avoid PoE……..

I think that's why they sell gophers by the dozen only.

 

[hvbias]

Perhaps the Panthers should get a friend that represents value - quality per $/€. A happy Budget Bear? Scrooge McDuck?

There is an official Lego minifig for Scrooge McDuck. Could do hatless, with head removed, and without a torso

 

[Tom C]

I’ve always felt that there is an underlying expectation at ASR that the reader will educate her/himself so as to be able to follow and participate in the discussion. A lot of synthesis goes into a simple recommended or not recommended. Amir, it seems to me, tries to take everything into consideration when making a recommendation. That $1,500 item may have gotten a not recommended because the buyer gets nothing for the extra money, while with the Wilson the buyer gets a solid build with the appearance of quality. It may not be to your taste. It may not be worth the money to you. But can Amir really decide those things for you? No, of course not.
I honestly do not believe for a moment that Wilson is being treated as some kind of sacred cow that Amir refuses to recommend against. Anybody can have an off day, but I greatly respect Amir’s opinion, and really don’t see an inconsistency in the way recommendations are done.

 

[MaxBuck]

It's Amir's website. He, and he alone, should determine the recommendation criteria IMO.

 

[JJB70]

I think this stems from a reaction against what some feel to be a double standard. In the past ASR has been pretty scathing about the mental gymnastics of other websites that note technical shortcomings of equipment but recommend it anyway. Stereophile and the sometimes striking contrasts between JA's objective assessment and the reviewers subjective assessments probably being the most obvious example. There has been a culture of dismissing any opinions not aligned with measurement. Yet now we see reviews here that note the objective evaluation isn't great but it is recommended anyway. Personally I have no objection to that, but I do think people should be consistent in attitudes and that it is one or the other. Either measurement and technical evaluation is everything or subjective impressions also matter, but I don't see how both positions can be promoted simultaneously. I think the reality is that while a purely"objective" approach based on measurement works for electronics it doesn't work for speakers and headphones. That's not to say measurement isn't an important part of evaluating speakers and headphones, but I think subjective impressions are also important. However subjective is a dirty word to some, maybe because it is one of those words which has been devalued by misuse.

 

[Joachim Herbert]

Can't we just look at the community poll, to see what people think of the speaker (and by extension purchase it or not)?
That, to me, is the answer to the overall recommendation.

Case in point:
View attachment 174365
Which tells me that 56% of the people wouldn't purchase this speaker.

More than 90 percent would not consider it as of now.

 

[watchnerd]

I would agree most would rather buy a $3800 speaker that sounds better. But not all. Some would turn up their noses if that speaker for $3800 looks cheap or pedestrian. I also agree price plays some part in a reviewers recommendation. In this case, Amir has documented more than anyone the speakers short comings. If you are one of the group wealthy enough, and count that appearance of extreme quality as valuable he does indicate the speaker with some EQ can sound better than you might expect. Everyone else can very easily see, in no way is such an over-priced under-performing speaker for me. So I don't see that anyone is misled by his review and recommendation. There is no aspect of his review that attempts to tempt someone who otherwise is about to buy a better cheaper speaker into spending $10k for this failure instead.

I, too, turn up my nose at Genelecs for my living room because of cosmetics.

I don't like Wilson cosmetics, either, but I don't prima facie have a problem with paying $10K for a speaker for which I appreciate the total experience (sound, measurements, cosmetics, build quality, haptics, provenance) and measure less perfectly than the Genelecs.

My $7K Dynaudio Heritage Specials probably describe that -- measure better than the Wilson Tune Tots, not as well as the Genelecs -- but look better, to me, than either. Awful value for money, though, from the POV of the Consumer Reports crowd.

I'm sure my recent Luxman L-590AXII amp purchase would also get shit on by the ASR community as being a terrible value for money at $9500, too. But it's my money and I like it.

 

[watchnerd]

So what I do not really understand is why this particular review yielded in tens of pages being spawned - is there really something new to see here? Is it the particular brand which fueled this? The price? Is this perhaps really the first review where the decision goes against what a lot of people 'feel' it should have been (hinest question: I've read only a fraction of reviews probably)?

Why?

Because a chunk of the ASR community gets off on the idea that expensive high-end brands are mostly over-priced rubbish, suitable only for rich rubes who believe in snake oil and audio voodoo.

Seeing high end products trashed is popular on ASR, with some of the masses piling on to amplify this narrative (see TotalDAC, for example).

Having the Tune Tots recommended conflicts with that narrative, creates cognitive dissonance, and that makes people cranky.

 

[watchnerd]

There seems to be some kind of groupthink contest going on here: as if people were competing to determine who is the more dedicated amirologist among us. If you take a step back, you get the impression that Amir is seen as some kind of prophet whose smallest utterance becomes the subject of a fastidious exegesis... That leads to a problem where the "true followers" are occasionally disappointed by the inconsistency of the prophet and where the "opponents" have a field day with conflicting data and opinion.

It's ironic, indeed.

Some of the community appear to need a guru.

They've just decided that instead of following a typical subjective audio guru, they want an objective guru.

And when the guru says things that cause friction with their beliefs, it upsets.

 

[Marc v E]

I think the beauty of this website is that price is taken out of the equation for an end result. And that all information is there for you to evaluate what's best for you.

Let me explain: I used to read a lot of reviews in magazines and websites which stated that a product was best in its price category. However in practice I found out this almost never works for me. There is a quality that is just right enough for me but this doesn't apply to everyone. That I think is skillfully done with the measurements and ratings. With the lenient threshold and absolute threshold. And also by comparing to a reference speaker and using eq to correct faults.

For example, if I take myself, I know from experience I can only be satisfied with something that sounds effortless and clean. It was quite a surprise to me that the genelec 8030 fit the bill. And more so that it was a blind buy based on this website. Same for topping dx7pro. So for me the measurements are enough to make a decision on. If we had recommendations strictly based on price/performance ratio it would only appear clearer while you should still take the effort and responsibility to make your own choice of what makes a good purchase for you.

 

[Marc v E]

I think the beauty of this website is that price is taken out of the equation for an end result. And that all information is there for you to evaluate what's best for you.

Let me explain: I used to read a lot of reviews in magazines and websites which stated that a product was best in its price category. However in practice I found out this almost never works for me. There is a quality that is just right enough for me but this doesn't apply to everyone. That I think is skillfully done with the measurements and ratings. With the lenient threshold and absolute threshold. And also by comparing to a reference speaker and using eq to correct faults.

For example, if I take myself, I know from experience I can only be satisfied with something that sounds effortless and clean. It was quite a surprise to me that the genelec 8030 fit the bill. And more so that it was a blind buy based on this website. Same for topping dx7pro. So for me the measurements are enough to make a decision on. If we had recommendations strictly based on price/performance ratio it would only appear clearer while you should still take the effort and responsibility to make your own choice of what makes a good purchase for you. If I read the recommendation correctly it is Amir's impression of a device. Nothing more. He could have called it "Amir likes it".

 

[watchnerd]

Where exactly do you plug the ethernet cable in a gopher? I hope PETA never finds out.

EDIT: I just found out a Gopher Client is an actual thing. I must be too young.

Now I feel old. Thanks!

 

[Tom C]

No one who is in charge here ever said only measurements matter, subjective never matters at all and has no place. At least not that I ever read. That is a straw man that people who like to perpetuate an argument tend to trot out now and then.
The JBL SDP-55 review ended in basically not recommended, due in large part, it seems, to the software being a hot, half-broken mess. What is the measurement for that? As Dr. Toole says, there is yet to be invented a device that will replace two ears and a brain (and there is no other audio site that is more about two ears and a brain). Yet, it’s still on my radar because of the dearth of 16-channel processors with XLR connectors and high-level output. Point being that you have to look at the whole review to get the most out of it.

 

[watchnerd]

I think this stems from a reaction against what some feel to be a double standard. In the past ASR has been pretty scathing about the mental gymnastics of other websites that note technical shortcomings of equipment but recommend it anyway. Stereophile and the sometimes striking contrasts between JA's objective assessment and the reviewers subjective assessments probably being the most obvious example. There has been a culture of dismissing any opinions not aligned with measurement. Yet now we see reviews here that note the objective evaluation isn't great but it is recommended anyway. Personally I have no objection to that, but I do think people should be consistent in attitudes and that it is one or the other. Either measurement and technical evaluation is everything or subjective impressions also matter, but I don't see how both positions can be promoted simultaneously. I think the reality is that while a purely"objective" approach based on measurement works for electronics it doesn't work for speakers and headphones. That's not to say measurement isn't an important part of evaluating speakers and headphones, but I think subjective impressions are also important. However subjective is a dirty word to some, maybe because it is one of those words which has been devalued by misuse.

If it were electronics, I would agree that this double standard reaction might have merit.

But this is a speaker review.

Transducers (speakers, headphones, microphones, cartridges) are so inherently flawed that even designs that map well to engineering consensus for what is "good" are still serious exercises in picking a palatable compromise.

Not to mention the complexities of speaker + room interaction.

I, personally, like speaker and headphone designs that deviate a bit (but not pathologically) from textbook. When transducers are so flawed, I don't think that's a double standard -- it's about picking the compromises one likes, as is inevitable.

 

[Kevinfc]

I think they are. My general impression is that Amir weighs a products value at its given price point rather heavily. He was pretty enthusiastic about the A07 at $70, I doubt he’d be nearly as enthusiastic if it was priced like the PA5.

 

[Walter]

It's Amir's website. He, and he alone, should determine the recommendation criteria IMO.

This was just what I was about to write. As long as he explains his reasoning and is reasonable consistent (with the understanding that his standards might change over time), I don't care what criteria he uses. I have my own criteria--and price is definitely a factor. There is no reason why that should be the same as his or anyone else's. I truly don't understand people even caring about this, much less getting upset.

 

[tuga]

I would give up the recommendations altogether. And the Preference Ratings.

The data is all that matters; people can use it as an indication of objective performance and then they should listen for themselves.
If they favour performance above enjoyment then they can skip the listening assessment. Simples.

 

[Jim Matthews]

Sorry for being quite frank here but I feel that during the years, this site got bloated with uneducated, clueless arrogant back-seat driver type of comments, often filled with hate. That's the real problem of this site.

This is the natural life cycle of any online forum.

Let us enjoy it, while it lasts.

 

[Jim Matthews]

I undeniably desire things that are beautifully made, even if less expensive offerings are measurably superior. That line is crossed at a much lower price point now, even accounting for when I made my own gear!

I would hazard a guess that almost all participants here are Men.
We have a deep seated desire to gather things, a successful survival trait passed down by our forefathers. We are a generation enjoying plenty.

The challenge for us (so afflicted) is to recognize when we cross the threshold from comfort into opulence.