Danny Richie's latest...

[ta240]

I was checking up on the CSS Typhon speaker and discovered Jay Lee has close to 100K youtube subscribers. Popularity is not everything but those are some impressive numbers for a younger reviewer. Still is not Robinson's 380K subscribers. The younger crowd wants video and podcasts. ASR has great technical depth but also can be intimidating for many lay people. Maybe a Young Amir show would help.

As for dumbing down, Danny’s latest youtube is how to determine how much NoRez to buy. Was expecting some discussion of when it may be needed acoustically or not, but was just how to measure the physical material. As you might guess with Danny, more is better as more NoRez sales pad his wallet more!

Feelings are fun, science is difficult. Selling dreams is easier than passing on knowledge.

But in all seriousness passion and excitement are more fun to watch than attacks and tearing down. Videos that counter the likes of Robinson tend to just run negative. So far I haven't seen a mix of technical knowledge and the comedic ability to make fun of someone or something without seeming to be just mean and negative.

I will be the first to admit though that I must have no idea what is good, because the more popular the people like Jay and Robinson get, the more they seem to make my skin crawl. So most people must really like that.
I guess I just don't like the absolute salesman vibe, while some people don't have a problem with it. I tend to leave stores and car lots when I encounter people like them. Guttenberg is what I consider a fun salesman.

There area a lot of people with deep knowledge of audio but knowing something and being able to teach or inform others about it are two different things. Especially when dealing with those that have no background in the area and aren't interested in going through a long and painful class in it.

There needs to be a Beakman's World version of the technical side Or even an Alton Brown of audio.

 

[DSJR]

Blind test have limited use in audio IMO. You need to live with a change for a while to decide if it’s better, even room treatments and positioning of treatments. Trying to select a pair of speakers this way may not work so well. If you preferred a certain speaker model tor example, it could have been hyped highs or extra bass, but in the long run the sound may cause fatigue or you wont want to listen as often. If you have a setup and you tend to just want to listen to music instead of focusing on perceived flaws, then you done good, regardless how you got there.

Actually and in my personal experience as well as the results of countless dems over the years, you don't need 'a while' to decide if it's 'better' or not... One can tell in seconds in a sighted dem and longer listening/playing with the gear most often confirmed the initial impression and I was NEVER in the market to flog boxes to unsuspecting punters knowing they'd be back in six months to buy the latest fad (that's all done on the forums now with often suspect used gear I believe).

A good weekend of listening is usually the most that anyone should need and believe me, the tactile and visual aspects of a piece of gear matter most here, rather than the 'sound' which is soon adjusted to I feel. We had very few things returned and clients came back adding to their sound rigs, so we must have been doing something right (I hope).

 

[kemmler3D]

The problem is that after being on this site for some years now, it is amazing how the snake oil industry just keeps going even though all of their lunacy has been proven wrong.

There are analogies for this everywhere in culture, around the world, from homeopathy, to flat earth beliefs, to end-times prophecies and other religious stuff, conspiracy theories from A-Z that lack a single shred of hard evidence, political nonsense, magic ionizing copper bracelets, palmistry, astrology, etc.

All of it has been disproven 1000 times over in 1000 ways.

The problem is not lack of proof, it never has been. The problem is beliefs clearly run on something other than proof. If we are to change wrong and harmful beliefs, we need to try a different approach - but what?

Those of us who (try to) base our beliefs on fact have a major weakness - we generally can't even see the other pillars of belief to attack. We disprove something and then sit there wondering how anyone could still believe it.

 

[Todd68]

I understand what this site is about. And it’s probably the best one to learn meaningful technical information. And you all try and save newcomers from being possibly conned. The thing is you won’t change the views of “the other side” they truly believe in what the hear either real or imagined. So the arguments and disagreements will never end.

And yes, many people change speakers and equipment regularly. Maybe looking for an improvement or there’s flaws they didn’t notice or bother them till they spent plenty of time with the gear.

Anyway, most people would have been 100% satisfied with my system with KEF R3 I tried out. We “both sides” are a small percentage that are so critical about sound quality, we’re probably half nuts if you think about, it’s a strange hobby to most, but I enjoy it nonetheless.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Feelings are fun, science is difficult. Selling dreams is easier than passing on knowledge.

Jim

 

[Jeff M.]

So I know am late to the party but, am kinda stuck where Danny is in terms of new ways of measuring and building speakers. So a few weeks ago we had a professional speaker installer come in and look at our sound system set and the sound board and all the amps and so on. I got to talking to him and I said how come you can’t replace the speakers in the speaker enclosure being used and up date the wire and crossovers in side the enclosure? and Also running new speaker wire? The installer told me 20 years ago they use to build and make their owe cabinets and put drivers in them and test them and so on. He told me everything is DSP and I need to get with the times and No one does that anymore it’s out dated. The only thing they do to help the Enclosure is spray on this coating to the out side of the boxes that dampens the sound. He also said it was a lot of work back then. He said our system is from 1982. It’s really only 22 years old. So basically be honest how I took it From him was that am an HI Fi Dinosaur and the times has passed me by. I just like the learning and hands on aspect of building my owe speakers and cables and so on. Plus some of the prices is just to steep for me still. So the reason I asked him if we are going to replace the drivers was that’s what we did that to our outside football sound system. The speaker drivers were blown and we replaced them and they lasted 20 years. Thanks for reading my long post and yes I enjoy Diy Audio. An average guy just enjoy the diy Hobby. Jeff

 

[Somafunk]

New audio unleashed podcast/discussion regarding measurement of speakers and a reply to Amirs post on previous podcast

 

[NTK]

I listened to about half of it and I had reached my limit. I must have to say that some of the errors that these guys had made are so fundamental that I found shocking. Aren't these people supposed to have decades of experience? Here is an example. The YT transcript is shown below (those inside [brackets] are my corrections):

29:38​

things that I want to get to but this one first is I have to admit I'm a little confused um what prompted this​

29:45​

this comment from Amir he says as to Harmon [Harman] they have measured speakers with the arrival of Dr tul [Toole] with CA 2034 style​

29:53​

measurements it is their protocol that got ratified as CA 2034 so to say that​

29:59​

they measured speakers before there was CA 2034 makes no sense their spinorama​

30:05​

was CA 2034 he's completely missing the point my point there was that all that​

30:12​

measurement was done with equipment that is more primitive than a clipple [Klippel] okay and people are deriding Danny for using​

30:18​

a Cleo instead of a clipple [Klippel] right but the Harmon [Harman] measure all that harm and research was done and the and the the uh​

30:26​

Canadian research before it was done with with gear that is no more advanced​

30:31​

than a Cleo and perhaps in some cases less Advanced actually definitely in some cases less Advanced and yeah so​

30:38​

that's not what we're saying what we're saying is you know the fact there's a new piece of gear out there doesn't​

30:44​

invalidate all that stuff and all the all the research we have was done with much more primitive gear than a clipple [Klippel]​

30:50​

okay so I think he just missed the point there we we know that's what we were saying it's like CTA 2034 was done with​

30:58​

primitive gear and that's what all the the science he's using was all done with​

31:04​

much more primitive gear than he has yeah yeah finally he says Rick is super​

31:09​

knowledgeable about speakers their measurements and design he is my expert DIY speaker Builder it's an appeal to​

​

They are claiming that the NRC Canada research and the Harman measurements using CTA-2034 techniques were done with "primitive" measurement gears (relative to the Klippel NFS), so Danny Richie using the Cleo Pocket was no different.

How could they have missed that the fact that the measurements made at NRC Canada and Harman were full spins all taken in calibrated anechoic chambers that cost many times the asking price of a Klippel NFS! And Richie's measurements were comparable? And these 2 guys completely overlooked this difference?

 

[Beave]

Brandolini's Law. Fighting bs online is a Sisyphean task.

 

[amirm]

They are claiming that the NRC Canada research and the Harman measurements using CTA-2034 techniques were done with "primitive" measurement gears (relative to the Klippel NFS), so Danny Richie using the Cleo Pocket was no different.

It is stunning, isn't it? Even though I specifically made the point that the acquisition device, i.e. the digitizer of microphone signal, is of no importance, he goes back to that as being the differentiator with Klippel. He doesn't realize that taking 72 measurements in anechoic measurement at NRC was the major innovation by Dr. Toole and crew to find measurements that predicted listener preference. And that a gated measurement at a few angles doesn't remotely do that.

Generating high resolution measurements of speakers in proper manner should be celebrated. Instead, folks are trying to defend the old ways because saying otherwise may impinge negatively on that reputation.

Finally, I can't believe he is making excuses for this measurement of Danny's design:

He claims this is the old trick of making tiny toy speakers have more bass by boosting upper region! If so, what is the reason behind that massive dip? If he has experience with speaker design then he should know that there is a fundamental flaw here.

 

[RickS]

As many of us are aware, there can be more than one path to a good answer. Some are trying to portray ASR members as unfeeling automatons. However, asking alleged experts for evidence to support their claims is fundamental to science (and other fact-based pursuits). If am newer to a field, one looks to experts in that field, but even experts can disagree. Without evidence, one cannot judge who may be correct or incorrect.

Keeping an open mind is essential to determining the truth. Without evidence, assuming that a supposed authority can do or has done something is worship rather than science. Wishful thinking rarely ensures a positive outcome in a technical domain such as audio. All Amir and I have asked of Danny is to provide evidence. We are placing no bounds if others want to believe he is a capable designer. Personally, as Danny has failed to provide the most basic measures, am skeptical. ASR has published positive GR reviews as well as negative ones. So, the evidence is here for anyone disciplined enough to consider his work more broadly and draw their own conclusions. 

 

[MattHooper]

I listen to that podcast fairly regularly now and generally enjoy it. But I was disappointed in both their original and now this response regarding ASR.

Those guys in the podcast seem to show a fairly superficial experience of ASR, implying some of the standard anti-ASR tropes.

Before even questioning Amir’s experience in audio, he couldn’t be bothered to even check on that, and simply presumed he worked at Microsoft having nothing to do with audio.

Finally, most of their conversations seem to just sort of hinted or imply that Amir does not have the experience to really know what he’s doing. But they did not seem to actually address this with any substantial criticism or examples. It was mostly all just implied - Brent has so much “more” experience.

If they think Amir is actually doing things wrong or doesn’t know what he’s doing or is making bad arguments, they should actually address those. The only one they bothered to address regarding measuring loudspeakers seems to have been a miss.

 

[Somafunk]

Yeah I thought similar, I’ve been listening to them for quite a while and enjoy their twitterings and knowledge on all things audio but on this episode I feel they firmly shut the doors to further inclusion with Amir and belittled the capabilities of the klippel, it seems like they are quite satisfied with their own knowledge of the subject and believe that an “upstart newcomer” with the means to drop the sum of $150k on test equipment does not amount to worthy consideration to join the “club”.

I could be entirely wrong on my reading of their criticisms so would be happy to be proved wrong.

 

[Spkrdctr]

I listen to that podcast fairly regularly now and generally enjoy it. But I was disappointed in both their original and now this response regarding ASR.

Those guys in the podcast seem to show a fairly superficial experience of ASR, implying some of the standard anti-ASR tropes.

Before even questioning Amir’s experience in audio, he couldn’t be bothered to even check on that, and simply presumed he worked at Microsoft having nothing to do with audio.

Finally, most of their conversations seem to just sort of hinted or imply that Amir does not have the experience to really know what he’s doing. But they did not seem to actually address this with any substantial criticism or examples. It was mostly all just implied - Brent has so much “more” experience.

If they think Amir is actually doing things wrong or doesn’t know what he’s doing or is making bad arguments, they should actually address those. The only one they bothered to address regarding measuring loudspeakers seems to have been a miss.

Just a thought. If these guys are so wrong on the basic fundamentals. Why listen to them at all? To me the extreme lack of knowledge would discount in my mind almost anything they say. I have never listened to them but after reading how screwed up they are, I was just thinking "why bother with them"?

 

[MattHooper]

Just a thought. If these guys are so wrong on the basic fundamentals. Why listen to them at all? To me the extreme lack of knowledge would discount in my mind almost anything they say. I have never listened to them but after reading how screwed up they are, I was just thinking "why bother with them"?

There are not “wrong on the fundamentals.”
Brent Butterworth has plenty of experience measuring audio gear, and has consulted for various speaker companies as well on a technical level. As well as being an advocate for blind testing.

This is just a minor disagreement, where each side is saying “ you missed my point.”
This happens all the time, including between Amir and plenty of the technically sophisticated members on this site.

Butterworth is generally well aligned with the ethos of ASR, even if he has some misconceptions about ASR.

I would find it absolutely silly to the use current disagreement as a reason to discount anything else they say on their podcast. I find that petty, too reactionary, and falls into the category of “ the narcissism of small differences.”

 

[amirm]

Just a thought. If these guys are so wrong on the basic fundamentals. Why listen to them at all? To me the extreme lack of knowledge would discount in my mind almost anything they say. I have never listened to them but after reading how screwed up they are, I was just thinking "why bother with them"?

As noted, Brent has been around for a long time, providing objective measurements of audio gear. So I am sure he has a lot to offer in general. In this regard though, it appears he is as much trying to defend his own limited measurements of speakers (due to lack of anechoic chamber or Klippel NFS) as he is Danny's. It is also indicative of someone who hasn't quite kept up with the changing times, i.e. fully understand what Klippel NFS is.

 

[RickS]

As noted, Brent has been around for a long time, providing objective measurements of audio gear. So I am sure he has a lot to offer in general. In this regard though, it appears he is as much trying to defend his own limited measurements of speakers (due to lack of anechoic chamber or Klippel NFS) as he is Danny's. It is also indicative of someone who hasn't quite kept up with the changing times, i.e. fully understand what Klippel NFS is.

Was rather busy at the time, but the podcast claim was that a speaker (re)design does not need measurements under 200 Hz. In this case though, the speaker in question is a 3-way design with an original crossover at 250 Hz. So good design practice would be to know the response at least an octave lower (125 Hz). Add to that the Danny's redesign drops the response from 3-5 dB between 200 and 1200 Hz. So, likely Danny's redesign is bass heavy.

While Danny does appear to improve the midrange on-axis response, his measurement axis is significantly different than JBL’s. So cannot compare his measurements to the original speaker baseline. I stand by my original critique of this redesign and, if someone has evidence to show otherwise, would be willing to reconsider. But taking a used speaker, not baselining against the original design specs and conditions (and ignoring that it may be broken in some way) is not a process any experienced designer would follow. Certainly not one that wants me to pay for his upgrade kit.

 

[Bleib]

 

[Spkrdctr]

I lasted 5 minutes.......snake oil!!

 

[Ageve]

I lasted 5 minutes.......snake oil!!

Yep.

The video is a collaboration with GR Research.

Danny posted the original video 11 days earlier, and included a link to lossless recordings.

The file owner on Google Drive is "Ron".