Bad Sounding Equipment that Measures Well

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

As far as electronics... no, I don't think there are any examples. For speakers the only thing I can think of is the ELAC DBR62, which some folks have said sounded "dull" to their ears.

I don't personally share that opinion, my DBR62s are probably the most satisfying audio purchase I've made in the last 10 years.

I would ask them if they've EQ'd the dbr's for their room (even though they are very well-behaved speakers, room correction still matters). Or, conversely, I would wonder what previous speakers they've owned and if they have a penchant for "brightness." All sorts of things can come into play when it comes to subjective impressions. That's why measurements are so useful...

 

[weasels]

I would ask them if they've EQ'd the dbr's for their room (even though they are very well-behaved speakers, room correction still matters). Or, conversely, I would wonder what previous speakers they've owned and if they have a penchant for "brightness." All sorts of things can come into play when it comes to subjective impressions. That's why measurements are so useful...

Agreed, and I strongly suspect in most cases it's the latter (they are accustomed to brighter speakers).

 

[charleski]

I will give credit where credit is due and admit he's a very good writer and I enjoy reading his articles...

I think it was in one of John Atkinson’s last editorials where he opened up and admitted that Stereophile was really all about entertaining the reader. They’re quite good at that, even Michael Fremer! (Though you’d think he’d have worked out by now there’s no point ranting in his column about how someone on t’internet told him he was full of ****.) And I must admit gaining a degree of smug satisfaction from the knowledge that I’m getting the same or better performance from a system that’s two orders of magnitude cheaper ...

 

[Putter]

View attachment 113326 Well, you know what Abe Lincoln said...
View attachment 113324
The source can (as I recall) actually be traced back to the BAS, and -- to their credit -- their online archive is pretty extensive.
Even if apocryphal (and I think skewed is a more apt, if generous, assessment), I still think it is profound and worthy of merit. Heck, just attribute it to me, going forward, if you like! I do have one aphorism for which I take credit, BTW: I call it Hardy's Law of Technology (from my days as a professional "Technology Strategist", whatever that meant): There is such a thing as too much technology.

As an aside - it is amazing how many of the bon mots that we learned in school are either way out of context or simply mis-attributed. Or is that bons mot?

PS It's funny how reviled the IHF standards (well... OK... the IHF power output standard*) became; I think "they" were trying to reflect in an objective and rationalizable way how to account for amplifier output performance with real-world signals (i.e., music), even way back in the 1950s and 1960s. Thanks to worldradiohistory.com we have easy (searchable!) access to magazines like Audio (and even Radio Electronics) and can read the 'first hand' accounts for context.

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Electronics/60s/1966/Radio-Electronics-1966-03.pdf
(see pg. 39)
__________
* some of the other IHF standards fared better over time

I did try to find the quote in BAS online files without success. It is easier to find something that is there than what isn't. Until someone actually finds the actual date and time of the reference I'll agree with Amirm.

On the OT, records measure bad compared to digital, but sound good at least to some ears. Vacuum tube amps measure bad or at least not as well as solid state, but again many prefer them. I realize that some of these differences might well disappear with good blind test.

 

[solderdude]

Exactly. The statement from bboris77 who posts here was “Ultimately, I’m interested in dispelling the myth of “Amir’s measurements are the only thing that matters”. So he’s already ignoring science and has a goal to dispel a myth, yet myths are easily dispelled so I thought there would be lots of bad sounding well-measured equipment.

The reason is simple, @bboris77 heard differences, that is... he is certain he heard differences and buys the SBAF gospel and is convinced brands like Schiit etc. have gurus that 'tune' amps by ear. It is impossible for him to believe otherwise. You can't believe both in measurements and subjective findings unless you really know a lot about both aspects. Those that do in general do not worry about many aspects.

But could there be some truth to the argument? Has anyone heard a DAC that measures > 110 dB SINAD that was bad? And I’m not talking about some fan boy who hates Topping and says they sound terrible, but an overall consensus from consumers and/or reviewers that this well measured component sounds bad.

The problem with measurements is that to characterize an amp you need to measure a LOT of different aspects in a lot of different conditions.
This, as well as reporting it, is a very time consuming endeavor. It has been mentioned many times. Especially folks like @pma, @restorer-john , @SIY and a few others have mentioned the pitfalls.
Its even worse with speakers, mics, instruments, TT cartridges, headphones. Basically everything mechanical/acoustical.

Those looking (and hopefully understanding) just a few familiar measurements will never see the relation between what's heard and measured and may not know what else to look for or what measurements imply. Nor do they often lack understanding of (their) hearing limits.

Amir shows some often used measurements acc. to standards or what has become a standard. He only shows the things he feels need showing and adds his impressions (means he does listen).

 

[Robin L]

I did try to find the quote in BAS online files without success. It is easier to find something that is there than what isn't. Until someone actually finds the actual date and time of the reference I'll agree with Amirm.

On the OT, records measure bad compared to digital, but sound good at least to some ears. Vacuum tube amps measure bad or at least not as well as solid state, but again many prefer them. I realize that some of these differences might well disappear with good blind test.

Again, I recall Tom Waits' line about preferring the sound of music from an old radio with a cracked speaker, sound coming from the window of a kitchen, somewhere else. De gustibus non disputandum est, but the measurements aren't lying either.

 

[JohnYang1997]

Let me tell you a real life story. 12 years ago I designed a discrete preamp which became popular among DIYers. I myself built about 50 - 100 modules. In the beginning, everything was OK. After about 20 modules built, I heard complaints from several users and I myself also found an irregular issue with hum presence and a bit elevated THD. And it was not permanent, only time after time. I used a soundcard and an oscilloscope, but was unable to find anything. Then I took one of the problematic modules to VHF spectrum analyzer, 3GHz Agilent. And I got it. Oscillations at 253MHz and multiples, occurring occasionally. I found it depended on the producer of BD139/140 and its parasitic capacitances. After that, I re-designed the PCB and local frequency compensations and it was OK. So, at least in the design stage, audio measurements are insufficient and even the AP is of no help. And I am sure that not many designers go to GHz analyzers.

View attachment 113321

Unless you actually use one. Not designed feature but oscillation at high frequency will throw off the high performance analyzer of AP you'd get an largely elevated noise floor with a notch at 1khz.
And I'm sure the supply current isn't all that stable when there's instability.

 

[Zensō]

Is there a single product ASR has reviewed as top notch that sounds bad, or is it just hyperbole to try and keep “hi-end” audio from being exposed to just 1’s and 0’s.

I‘d say it’s mostly hyperbole. Well measuring source gear will reproduce music with minimal coloration. Some audiophiles prefer a colored sound though, which is where the disconnect comes in. If more audiophiles spent time in a recording or mastering studio, where monitoring systems are designed to be as transparent as possible, I suspect there would be less interest in colored gear and more interest in transparent reproduction.

 

[Robin L]

I‘d say it’s mostly hyperbole. Well measuring source gear will reproduce music with minimal coloration. Some audiophiles prefer a colored sound though, which is where the disconnect comes in. If more audiophiles spent time in a recording or mastering studio, where monitoring systems are designed to be as transparent as possible, I suspect there would be less interest in colored gear and more interest in transparent reproduction.

If more audiophiles spent time in a recording studio [or freelancing at a remote recording, which is usually the case with "Classical" music], they would realize that microphones all have a sound of their own, that they are transducers, that they have as much impact on the sound going into the recording as the speakers playing the sound coming out. We are sold on the notion of recreating the sound of the performers in the room with us, but what we hear is a combination of colorations from the microphones feeding the mixer. I can imagine microphones that have less coloration, but the art of recording comes from knowing what palette of microphone colors will work with a given piece of music. And with most modern popular music, "The Absolute Sound" is beside the point anyway, reality was thrown out the window a long time ago.

 

[Lambda]

Some audiophiles prefer a colored sound though

If someone wants coloration it can easy be added by dedicated devices.

Well measuring source gear will reproduce music with minimal coloration.

If the set of measurements is incomplete it's possible small amounts of coloration can be pressent without detection.
For example If low Frequency's at relatively low volumes causing high order harmonics.
this would not relay show up in the standard set of tests? but could be heard.

But that's unlikely to happen by accident, someone would have to deign this coloration in the product and then try to hide it from being measured.

 

[DSJR]

I do understand Robin L's post above #49 but also have experienced the vibe in acbarn's post above that #48. I think mic choice and so on is more an artistic one (s'cuse clumsy words) but since it appears that many/most 'high end' domestic systems are so severely compromised from the room downwards, the end user chooses an eclectic range of gear for their system and decent measurements or 'fit for purpose' be damned. I've been all but hounded off subjectively based forums because the posters there just aren't interested in the slightest and this forum has been singled out for ridicule and how I 'listen' to test measurements instead of music

 

[mhardy6647]

I did try to find the quote in BAS online files without success. It is easier to find something that is there than what isn't. Until someone actually finds the actual date and time of the reference I'll agree with Amirm.

Yeah, me too -- I think I may send a few emails. Anon.
Thanks!

 

[pma]

Unless you actually use one. Not designed feature but oscillation at high frequency will throw off the high performance analyzer of AP you'd get an largely elevated noise floor with a notch at 1khz.
And I'm sure the supply current isn't all that stable when there's instability.

And you ever measured audio component with oscillations at 250MHz/20mV?? Yes or no, I am interested in facts only, no guesses. The only difference I measured was in higher mains components ( looked like groundloop) and slightly higher THD 1kHz.

 

[JohnYang1997]

And you ever measured audio component with oscillations at 250MHz/20mV?? Yes or no, I am interested in facts only, no guesses. The only difference I measured was in higher mains components ( looked like groundloop) and slightly higher THD 1kHz.

Of course yes. That's why you need some base stopper and some zobel network to kill off the local oscillation. 200Mhz scope is enough to see all that only amplitude is not very accurate. Scope in GHz is overkill. And like I said you'll throw off AP's high performance analyzer and you'll see supply current not being so stable.

 

[SimpleTheater]

If someone wants coloration it can easy be added by dedicated devices.

You're talking about turntables.

 

[Zensō]

I've been all but hounded off subjectively based forums because the posters there just aren't interested in the slightest and this forum has been singled out for ridicule and how I 'listen' to test measurements instead of music

Subjectivists feel threatened when their “golden ear” status is challenged by those who are trying to discern the truth. To them, audio is about mysticism and magic and the sanctity of subjective impressions. This site and its adherents are a threat to their audio worldview.

 

[Ron Texas]

This problem could be solved with antipsychotic meds.

 

[sigbergaudio]

I think you at least to some extent can at least find the opposite. Many amplifier with "low" SINAD compared to the best measuring amplifiers here will still sound perfectly fine. That the ones that measure well in all respects will sound bad I think is less likely.

 

[Roland]

Subjectivists feel threatened when their “golden ear” status is challenged by those who are trying to discern the truth. To them, audio is about mysticism and magic and the sanctity of subjective impressions. This site and its adherents are a threat to their audio worldview.

Likewise, objectivists feel threatened when challenged about whether stuff that measures well actually sounds better, or if not, why not. An objectivists world begins and ends with the measurement. I’m still looking to help find an explanation as to why my Naim Supernait 2 sounds much better than my Yamaha RX-A3080 in pure direct with the same Topping D50s and Revel f206s. It may be partly explained by the fact that the Naim has a massive toroidal power transformer and huge power capacitors, but I’m happy to keep reading the discussions here until a scientifically measured answer emerges (other than the lazy unproven presumption: “it’s all perceptual bias”).

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Words like "better" or "sounds bad" are problematic. All most of us are looking for from measurements is an assurance that the signal coming out of the component is not altered (in a way that the component isn't intended to alter it) from the one going into it. If someone wants to argue that one measurably transparent dac sounds "better" than another, a primary step in the process is to prove that perceptual bias isn't at play.