GR Research LGK 2.0 Speaker Review (A Joke)

[Mark_A]

If he does an around about like Schiit did and gets with a honest and integrity based business plan he will be OK but if he pursues the snake oil and greedy cash grabs I am going to be a nemesis.

I spent a long time authoring YouTube comments trying to explain to people why you cannot improve the performance of digital music being streamed from the Internet, by adding another "audiophile" network switch for $3,500 in-between your ISP router and your streaming device. Having worked in Enterprise IT for 40 years, I explained how digital signals from the Internet to the streaming device are transmitted via TCP/IP over Internet, and an audiophile switch in the path cannot remove jitter or improve the signal. But many people don't want to listen to me or anyone else who understands TCP/IP over Ethernet. So you can be a nemesis all you want, but probably won't change anyone's mind.

A fool and his money are easily parted. I guess a lot of people got so much stimulus money from the government, that they can't figure out how to spend it.

 

[Doodski]

I spent a long time authoring YouTube comments trying to explain to people why you cannot improve the performance of digital music being streamed from the Internet, by adding another "audiophile" network switch for $3,500 in-between your ISP router and your streaming device. Having worked in Enterprise IT for 40 years, I explained how digital signals from the Internet to the streaming device are transmitted via TCP/IP over Internet, and an audiophile switch in the path cannot remove jitter or improve the signal. But many people don't want to listen to me or anyone else who understands TCP/IP over Ethernet. So you can be a nemesis all you want, but probably won't change anyone's mind.

A fool and his money are easily parted. I guess a lot of people got so much stimulus money from the government, that they can't figure out how to spend it.

The last 5 years of my 9 year career sales selling home audio gear convinced me that mass change can occur. Persistent daily effort delivered in a honest and proper manner can change people one at a time and after awhile the word gets out and the general consensus changes. I profited from that by pushing KEF, Yamaha and other good value products while the other sales people where taking the easy road I developed a environment that was more difficult to make but I was rewarded for that and paid well/better. Grabbing the low hanging fruit and selling snake oil is exactly the opposite of what I consider a good business plan. I doubt Danny is going to see the light but he gets a proper kick at the can.

 

[Mark_A]

Transistors and the peripheral components are more than capable of reproducing full bandwidth 20HZ to 20kHz all at the same time and can be measured for linearity. Linearity in this instance being the input to the output signal integrity. It's not difficult for these devices to do this. Measuring that is not magical or out of reach too. It's clear and decisive technology that we use these days for this sort of measurements. It has been done for decades with older and now newer instruments.

EDIT: So measuring speakers with electronics is more than a capable system.

I didn't say it is not possible to create such tests, I said I have not seen any standardized instrument test that plays multiple frequencies at the same time to see how a speaker system reacts to that. Even if one could come up with such tests, how do you determine which frequency combinations are important and which aren't? That requires some level of judgement or subjectivity.

In a somewhat similar manner, the choice of which music tracks (that do typically have multiple frequencies at the same time) to play for a listening test also requires some subjective judgements, because not everyone is going to agree which tracks are the best for evaluating equipment and which are not relevant, because everyone has different musical tastes, and different levels of hearing ability.

 

[Doodski]

I said I have not seen any standardized instrument test that plays multiple frequencies at the same time to see how a speaker system reacts to that. Even if one could come up with such tests, how do you determine which frequency combinations are important and which aren't?

What about pink noise and white noise. They are full hearing range spectrum signals. They have been used for a long time and are standards.

 

[Mark_A]

The last 5 years of my 9 year career sales selling home audio gear convinced me that mass change can occur. Persistent daily effort delivered in a honest and proper manner can change people one at a time and after awhile the word gets out and the general consensus changes. I profited from that by pushing KEF, Yamaha and other good value products while the other sales people where taking the easy road I developed a environment that was more difficult to make but I was rewarded for that and paid well/better. Grabbing the low hanging fruit and selling snake oil is exactly the opposite of what I consider a good business plan. I doubt Danny is going to see the light but he gets a proper kick at the can.

In the era of the Internet, there are always gong to be people who believe in theories that are not true, and that includes folklore about audio cables. I think you would be surprised the number of Americans who don't believe the USA landed a man on the moon in 1969.

 

[Mark_A]

What about pink noise and white noise. They are full hearing range spectrum signals. They have been used for a long time and are standards.

I didn't say that signals with multiple frequencies cannot be generated. I said there is no standardized and accepted test using multiple frequencies in the evaluation of a speaker, that could completely replace listening tests. If such a test did exist and were universally accepted, then it would have to produce a "score" that buyers could rely on without having to listen to the speaker.

Although I am a big believer in scientific testing, the decision about what tests to use to evaluate and score speakers would requires subjective judgment.

 

[Doodski]

In the era of the Internet, there are always gong to be people who believe in theories that are not true, and that includes folklore about audio cables. I think you would be surprised the number of Americans who don't believe the USA landed a man on the moon in 1969.

The audio cables, power cables and internet connection switches urban rumors and folklore stuff is a embarrassment to humanity...lol.

 

[Doodski]

there is no standardized and accepted test using multiple frequencies in the evaluation of a speaker, that could completely replace listening tests. If such a test did exist and were universally accepted, then it would have to produce a "score" that buyers could rely on without having to listen to the speaker.

Good luck developing a, "Standard." That requires some effort. Standards are difficult to develop for good reason and are very comprehensive when applied for good reason again.

 

[Doodski]

You're correct. However .... some people cling viciously to contrarian points of view because it makes them feel "special". Jim

When I started studying electronics formally I was so very stoked to be getting some form of advanced education and could barely contain myself. I did whatever I was told to by my instructors, studied till 12am to 2am every week night and Saturdays and Sundays for ~ 4 hours each day. I really wanted to not be left behind and be ignorant and have no proper skills. I had a college certificate in technical drafting although I considered it a artsy fartsy thing and not the nitty gritty fundamentals technical knowledge that I desired that would explain the many questions I had regarding the technology around me. So to see the people that at the least could but do not take lead from those that are experts makes me wince.

 

[Geert]

When I started studying electronics formally I was so very stoked to be getting some form of advanced education and could barely contain myself. I did whatever I was told to by my instructors, studied till 12am to 2am every week night and Saturdays and Sundays for ~ 4 hours each day.

Unfortunately you didn't know hanging around on subjective forums was the way to go to demonstrate true passion

 

[Doodski]

Unfortunately you didn't know hanging around on subjective forums was the way to go to demonstrate true passion

Lol... Yes, true. Hehe. The occupation of electronics is now behind me and is now a beloved chatty pastime.

 

[atoprak]

I spent a long time authoring YouTube comments trying to explain to people why you cannot improve the performance of digital music being streamed from the Internet, by adding another "audiophile" network switch for $3,500 in-between your ISP router and your streaming device. Having worked in Enterprise IT for 40 years, I explained how digital signals from the Internet to the streaming device are transmitted via TCP/IP over Internet, and an audiophile switch in the path cannot remove jitter or improve the signal. But many people don't want to listen to me or anyone else who understands TCP/IP over Ethernet. So you can be a nemesis all you want, but probably won't change anyone's mind.

A fool and his money are easily parted. I guess a lot of people got so much stimulus money from the government, that they can't figure out how to spend it.

Oh that switch thing...
I have involved one discussion about this... but couldn’t get along ...
It was legend...

It is something like going off road for 100miles but finding tarmac in last 100 feet and claiming "a comfortable ride" after all......

 

[Mark_A]

Oh that switch thing...
I have involved one discussion about this... but couldn’t get along ...
It was legend...

It is something like going off road for 100miles but finding tarmac in last 100 feet and claiming "a comfortable ride" after all......

Those audiophile switches are not any better than most other switches (unless the switch is complete junk), so they are not even giving you any additional smooth tarmac. It's all 100% BS. Once the TCP/IP packets reach their final destination (like a streamer of DAC) the the data inside the packets can be extracted and maybe improved in theory. However, adding an audiophile switch in-between an existing router/switch and a music streamer that is expecting TCP/IP from the host (such as Tidal), cannot alter the data in the packets.

Just to be clear, digital audio signals transported via toslink, USB, coax, etc that do not use TCP/IP over Ethernet, don't have the same level of guaranteed data integrity, and at least in theory, some of those other cables may improve the signal (or keep it from errors). Also, once the TCP/IP packets reach their final destination (as TCP/IP packets) the the data inside the packets can be extracted and maybe improved in theory.

 

[Mark_A]

You're correct. However .... some people cling viciously to contrarian points of view because it makes them feel "special". Jim

I think it is just a lot easier to give opinions about subjective sonic benefits of things like super-expensive audiophile cables, than it is to study and understand math and science.

 

[Mark_A]

You're correct. However .... some people cling viciously to contrarian points of view because it makes them feel "special". Jim

I am not sure that belief in the audible superiority of massively expensive cables is a contrarian view. Just because it is wrong, doesn't make it contrarian.

 

[Mark_A]

Correct. But when someone is shown proof that something is wrong and they contradict the proof, that IS contrarian. I didn't say all people who buy snake oil do that, I said some people who buy snake oil do that, and it's because contradicting others makes them feel more important, more powerful, or as I said, "special".

A person can be contrarian by virtue of their deeds as well as by virtue of their words. In other words, they can contradict something by their actions, without saying a thing. If you show someone proof that massively expensive cables have no audible superiority, and they go out and purchase massively expensive cables anyway, that's being contrarian.

Jim

I looked up the word contrarian in the dictionary, and it says:

contrarian (noun)

"a person who takes a contrary position or attitude specifically : an investor who buys shares of stock when most others are selling and sells when others are buying"

contrarian (adjective)

"Anyone who thinks that most of what the public believes is wrong would be called a contrarian. And contrarian is a basic term in the vocabulary of investing. In fact, most successful investors often behave like contrarians by "buying low and selling high"—that is, buying stocks that are cheap because most investors put a low value on them but that have the possibility of rising, and selling stocks that most investors are valuing highly but that seem likely to decline. The word may be most common as an adjective; so you may express a contrarian opinion, hold a contrarian view, or pursue a contrarian investment strategy."

Someone who states something that is contrary the facts is called something else, not a contrarian. Almost all of the great scientists in history were contrarians, because their theories were different than those of the past, and they were considered to be great if and when their theories eventually became accepted.

 

[Mark_A]

I looked up the word, and you're correct.
All these years (60+), I have used the word differently. The word had a pejorative connotation, in that it meant someone who contradicts without good reason. I have no idea whether the use as an investment term existed at that time, but I know that I either wasn't taught that use of the word or I ignored that use. And although I can understand your application in relation to scientists who pioneered new ideas, if I had described Copernicus as "contrarian" when I went to school, I probably would have gotten a ruler across the knuckles. As I said, the word had a pejorative or deprecatory connotation. Contrarians were antagonists, not reformers.

So I must apologize. Even though the etymology of the word cites "contradict" as a base, I realize that society uses words differently as time goes on.

I will cease my contrarian ways. Jim

No problem. I don't know about Copernicus, but Galileo antagonized a lot of people.

There is a theoretical physicist named named Sabine Hossenfelder who has antagonized a lot of her peers by saying:

1. We don't need a bigger particle accelerator to be constructed because it will be a waste of money, since nothing new was really discovered with the Large Hadron Collider, the world's largest and most powerful particle accelerator, other than to verify the existence of Higgs boson particle that was proposed in 1964.
2. String Theory has not panned out as people had hoped, even though there are many scientists pushing that theory, largely because their whole career is tied to it.
3. Dark Matter is not a proven theory and there are a lot of problems with it.

I personally think she is one of smartest people on the planet. Here is her YouTube Channel:

https://www.youtube.com/c/SabineHossenfelder

 

[mhardy6647]

^^^ Careers... tied to string theory.

 

[Mark_A]

Good luck developing a, "Standard." That requires some effort. Standards are difficult to develop for good reason and are very comprehensive when applied for good reason again.

If Amir developed such a standard test and used it for all his speaker reviews, it might catch on.

 

[Doodski]

If Amir developed such a standard test and used it for all his speaker reviews, it might catch on.

There is a issue with having a power handling test in that it can be a destructive test. What @amirm does is NDT (non-destructive testing.). To use destructive tests is to need a repair workbench, more instrumentation, spare parts, many tools, the space for that and money for parts to repair peoples' gear that has been damaged during testing. That's why he does not heat/power soak gear in testing it. To avoid break-down issues.