Boom....and he plans for more as he gives in room measurements for each of his speaker reviews now, but reminds viewers that they are "in room".
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Cheap class D amps. Andrew Robinsons take.
- Thread starter Mackie
- Start date
No, I regret. There would be no point for this. The care for proper tiers-measurements has to come with objectiveness and independence in mind. You seem to forget about one thing: Andrew Robinson is not a reviewer, he is an advertiser. His independence doesn't exist, as he will always be gentle to manufacturers that loan him products (not for free, even if he says otherwise, he still is indirectly paid by advertising)
Contact — Of Sound Design
www.therobinsonbrand.com
Anyway, that's very kind of you trying to make him less incompetent.
Last edited:
He is an entertainer. But this video is a great perspective on the whole group of YouTube reviewers. None of them are truly independent.
I would argue that the ONLY truly independent reviewer is the one who never gets anything sent by the manufacturer. In the US, we have Consumer Reports.
Archimago and Amir are objective but get some gear sent by manufacturers which introduces some “selection bias” in the content, but the objective approach makes their reporting reliable. That said, when a manufacturer sends a product, glitches are more likely to be worked through before publication. That’s the right thing to do, but it puts gear sent in by readers at a potential weakness.
I have never taken any audio product from a manufacturer, but even I am biased. If there is something that will hurt my resale value, I might not post the results until my unit is sold. Likewise, when I favor something personally I will work harder to analyze it (like the Sony TA-ZH1ES or even the Rapahelite amp with multiple speaker loads tested) to try to figure out why I like it.
In every case, my goal is to identify one’s blind spots and biases and enjoy the music.
I agree on this. Yet, it doesn't change the final results: measurements, if done properly and methodically, are measurements. The fact that manufacturers sent the product to you or not should not change the final data (expect for risks of cherry picked samples, for sure
)I don't think Amir & Archimago are comparable with subjectivists reviewers your are mentioning. That, at least for one reason: With subjective reviews, you are free to say whatever the heck you want about the product's performance, not with objective reviews. Plus, neither Amir, Archimago, nor Erin offer advertising services to companies. A. Robinson, Darko and S. Guttenberg certainly do. Needless to say, 95% of their reviews are always positive anyway. How is that helpful to make a purchase? I don't know.
Last edited:
I ran tests on three A07s which I bought at different times and which had different capacitors. They all measured exactly the same.
New Aiyima A07 with unknown stock Capacitor?
so if you're getting "ok caps" from shenzen well then, 'ok' i guess??? at least its not false advertisment... not great caps, just ok You can get any brand you want as long as you buy enough of them.
www.audiosciencereview.com
I ran tests on three A07s which I bought at different times and which had different capacitors. They all measured exactly the same.
There can be differences in the output between an A07 and an AB amp, depending on the speakers. I measured a difference of half a dB in the highest part of the frequency band when testing Kef LS50 Metas. Though I think he moves his microphone about a bit.New Aiyima A07 with unknown stock Capacitor?
so if you're getting "ok caps" from shenzen well then, 'ok' i guess??? at least its not false advertisment... not great caps, just ok You can get any brand you want as long as you buy enough of them.
I think he said the A08 measured differently each time he tried it - my guess is he accidentally touched the tone controls or maybe moved the Amp slightly and that caused the tone controls to move. I think with the Fosi Audio it measurement the same each time (which makes more sense as I think the tone controls on the Fosi Audio are better and have a 'defeat position'.
I actually liked his video about room measurements and using REW but this video was poor. Nothing against the Cambridge Amp he compared these amps too but he seems to use the acrylic B50 in a power comparison with the Cambridge and not compare the Aiyima or Fosi Audio against the Cambridge as far as Power is concerned.
Not too sure about this...as the context of the text must be taken into consideration. If the videos are actually looked at, Andrew doesn't seem to care what the suppliers think. One supplier that will remain nameless (you can see the video on his site) refused to give any product to Andrew because of a less than stellar review. Kristi will drop a bomb on any company and tell them to...as they say "Come at me bro!" You present this link as a pretext only to develop one yourselfNo, I regret. There would be no point for this. The care for proper tiers-measurements has to come with objectiveness and independence in mind. You seem to forget about one thing: Andrew Robinson is not a reviewer, he is an advertiser. His independence doesn't exist, as he will always be gentle to manufacturers that loan him products (not for free, even if he says otherwise, he still is indirectly paid by advertising)
View attachment 283694Contact — Of Sound Design
Anyway, that's very kind of you trying to make him less incompetent.
(as you hint a subterfuge, Andrew hiding his true intent and being paid for by advertising-when clearly covered in your link to the FAQ's as being paid by commission), but you claim possible dishonesty by saying his independence doesn't exist. I site the videos he produces and especially some of his wife's comments as evidence that autonomy does exist as they have differed on many occasion. They're subjective reviewers - subjective...but reviewers.Now, who Andrew does lean towards is the hair company ..I forget the name of it, and he states in his disclaimers that he's also an Amazon affiliate (Hmm, I wonder what his review of those amps did to the commissions he receives if you buy through the links of said products...that he states will not affect the site's content). This is looked at under the site's Disclaimers link. Looking further into the FAQ's link, you will find that they will not share the review of a product with a brand or manufacture in advance of the publication date. There are no exceptions. This is what caused a manufacturer to drop them.
When the site is taken into context - to include the shop button that leads directly to Amazon (which includes a lot of cheap stuff...and nothing from stuff like B&W, Mission etc......because the agreement is with Amazon..hey if I wanted more commission I'd have every speaker or product I've reviewed in those links), Andrew is being very forthright where his cash-flow is coming from. As a mater of fact...it states openly "earns Commissions"...but I haven't see him push a lot of the stuff in his shop link (decorations and camera stuff). Once again - the statement of being "gentle to manufacturers who loan him product" has been proven to be a deviation from accuracy - which is error, and another example of eisegesis.
So the advertiser has some morals after all… I don’t see why this changes anything?
Yeah, that’s what’s called great salesmanship tactics! None of this makes it not independent.You present this link as a pretext only to develop one yourself
This is why I like a mix of objective reviews (is it broken) and subjective reviews (how did it sound to you...not saying it will sound the same to me). Objectivity gets me in the right place electronically, I'm not buying something broken, but subjectivity gets me where I live....at home. I've sold off a bunch of high SINAD stuff to include my MiniDSP Flex (the balanced version less than a month old). I sold it for only $300 bucks with cables (cost me twice that amount). I've never regretted selling it ...because I really didn't need it. I could do what I already wanted to do (now if they ever get the 88A back in stock - that's a different story - I can use that for my analog immersive audio setup). The only thing that's helpful is plugging it up at home. Like I said...the numbers tell you if it's engineered properly, but whatever it is must still pass my own psychosis, the way it looks in the system if it is seen at all, you have to be comfortable with your purchases.I agree on this. Yet, it doesn't change the final results: measurements, if done properly and methodically, are measurements. The fact that manufacturers sent the product to you or not should not change the final data (expect for risks of cherry picked samples, for sure
I don't think Amir & Archimago are comparable with subjectivists reviewers your are mentioning. That, at least for one reason: With subjective reviews, you are free to say whatever the heck you want about the product's performance, not with objective reviews. Plus, neither Amir, Archimago, nor Erin offer advertising services to companies. A. Robinson, Darko and S. Guttenberg certainly do. Needless to say, 95% of their reviews are always positive anyway. How is that helpful to make a purchase? I don't know.
From the text - perform proper exegesis (that's a science) to prove that those statements are great salesmanship tactics (I've been one of those too). If not, just like subjectivist, its just your opinion which you are allowed to have, but are not based on fact. There is a science to breaking down the meaning of statements, but you must have the accompanying data....and like science itself - is subject to re-looking as new data becomes available. (My old job - naval cryptologic analyst).
Well, right back at ya then… I’ve seen no proof of anything you said either.., it’s irrelevant to the subject anyway, because either way it doesn’t prove independence.
Last edited:
Agree 100%. Sorry if that's not clear. I was trying to point out how there is a spectrum of bias no matter how objectivist you try to be. Obviously much worse with pure subjectivists. You can find me on other forums "defending" the measurement rationale here.
No different than reading a movie review or restaurant review? You gain insights into ergonomics and feature set. There is selection bias in what they are writing about/reviewing. You can learn about new products you might not know about (the marketing aspect).
You can see their in-room measurements for speakers which can show how B&W speakers can somehow measure flatter in-room compared to the expected peaks.
You and I both do measurements -- the Atoll is a great example of showing something that is bad. Your review is essential for pushing Atoll to work harder in the next revision. But a real question -- can you hear the weakness of the Atoll in blind testing against others? Would be very interesting to try. I can see a Francophile choosing to buy the Atoll as a way to support the local economy and next iteration of development.
My proof rest in the statements made in the totality of each of his links on his page and it's context. Further proof resides in each individual review that Andrew and Kristi have given (I think I stated that in another post). The data speaks for itself. My statements are backed by the data (you have to go and look at the data...in this case the website links and listen to the reviews, like you look at measurements). The observation would be "is Andrew Robinson a subjective reviewer or an advertiser"? Then we would proceed to the data - never speaking our opinion into that data (eisegesis) - just taking that data. If the data shows that he's a subjective reviewer - he stands as such until a continued deviation from such occurs (as one piece of data doesn't suffice as a change in the original observation - however a continued pattern of data would cause the need for a new hypothesis).
What data is that? Why does that data prove one or the other? I don’t see it…
I actually defended the measurements points on Andrew's site. He asked me if I would buy a speaker on just measurements alone and I told him no. I did notice something though...after that, Andrew started putting in room measurements up with his speaker reviews. Did I have anything to do with that...I actually don't think so, but I was happy when he started including it (even though I know his room is specially treated).
It's the data of statements - repetitiveness, how inline are they with other statements, truths and counters, such as "have they only given glowing reviews to people who loan their gear" that's an observation within itself which came back negative - they've given bad reviews to loaners, there's a myriad of verbal data in exegetic studies. Just like people go to college to study acoustics (much of which I've forgotten under radio wave modulation and signal multiplexing) there's also a study of words, gist, intent, context. Are you ready to dig in?
No, I see nothing concrete, only hand waving…
In my opinion, he is solely subjective ( he sort of uses measurements when he wants to “prove his subjective” comments - which in my opinion is very wrong). Again my opinion but I don’t think he is an advertiser directly ( taking money for favourable videos ) but I think he is more dominated by the ascetics of the product than the any measurement, so if it looks good and sounds “ok” he will give it a favourable review.
Some times his in room measurements will be thrown in but I don’t think he cares as much as long as he can’t hear a difference he will make up a subjective difference.
Mostly I only subscribe for the eye candy and definitely not any recommendations
Some times his in room measurements will be thrown in but I don’t think he cares as much as long as he can’t hear a difference he will make up a subjective difference.
Mostly I only subscribe for the eye candy and definitely not any recommendations
What context? Every review, per US law, needs to clearly stipulate the nature of the product in review. This is why every review I do starts with where I got the product. You don't see that in any youtube video. This needs to change. You shouldn't be guessing. If product and money has changed hands for the review, this needs to be the first sentence out of his mouth. Lacking that, I do see almost every video review Andrew does as an informercial.
Similar threads
