Yeah, exactly. So when he said what he said, they probably had at best some rough, low resolution on axis measurements.
-
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!
Interesting quote
- Thread starter murraycamp
- Start date
Yeah, exactly. So when he said what he said, they probably had at best some rough, low resolution on axis measurements.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Might have been between 1991 and 2004 when he was the one making the AES magazine.
If that's the case measurements were plenty good already.
There are plenty of other 'highly regarded' folks who have made controversial statements.
Context may matter as well as which measurements he was actually referring to.
The problem with measurements is:
Are all relevant measurements made.
Are those made correctly.
Do the measurements have enough resolution.
Are the results interpreted correctly.
Are we talking about acoustic or electrical measurements.
Such is the difficulty with broad sweeping remarks as it would have been made in reply to something or some broad remark based on a belief. Context may be everything.
If that's the case measurements were plenty good already.
There are plenty of other 'highly regarded' folks who have made controversial statements.
Context may matter as well as which measurements he was actually referring to.
The problem with measurements is:
Are all relevant measurements made.
Are those made correctly.
Do the measurements have enough resolution.
Are the results interpreted correctly.
Are we talking about acoustic or electrical measurements.
Such is the difficulty with broad sweeping remarks as it would have been made in reply to something or some broad remark based on a belief. Context may be everything.
JSmith
Master Contributor
If it measures good and sounds bad... you're not into hi-fi. 
JSmith
JSmith
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 23,136
- Likes
- 43,064
I think I first read this in one of the magazines in the early 1990's. Definitely prior to 2000. I think it was from earlier than then.
It at least appeared in TAS in volume 12 which I think is 1987. It was something he said at a Boston Audio society meeting according to that.
Last edited:
solderdude
Grand Contributor
1991 is in the early 1990's and before 2000.
In 1967 he became chairman in the AES already.
Being a member of the AES does not guarantee that everything that person states is true even if they earned their stripes.
In 1967 he became chairman in the AES already.
Being a member of the AES does not guarantee that everything that person states is true even if they earned their stripes.
Really? Which models?
The Magnepan LRS and LRS+ have gotten rave reviews despite the fact that they measure incredibly bad. But to my ears they’re simply unlistenable.
The larger models like the 20.7 measures better, but nowhere near what I would call good. Not very satisfying to listen to either, since they lack dynamics, bass impact and low-mid clarity. Way too much distortion below 500 Hz at virtually any SPL.
No kidding. Sonic junk IMO, but then a lot of iconic "hi-fi" brands are.
If it measures bad and sounds good, you're listening to a carefully-chosen recording.
Which is fine, if that's the only thing you want to listen to. IME, the flatter/more-neutral speakers will sound decent playing pretty much anything.
Chris
Which is fine, if that's the only thing you want to listen to. IME, the flatter/more-neutral speakers will sound decent playing pretty much anything.
Chris
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 13,630
- Likes
- 30,382
He was, in fact, their chief engineer for most, perhaps all, of his tenure there.
A Saturn V rocket might measure exceptionally good, but it's pretty much useless for listening to Boz Scaggs' greatest hits, i.e., it's bad for that particular application. I'm frankly amazed anyone would get as worked up about the von Recklinghausen quote as some on this forum have.
The problem with the quote is that there is no actual record that he ever said that. I recall seeing an article challenging that statement based on the idea that as engineer and head of the AES Society would be unlikely to devolve into what I call subjectivistan. I searched for an original source on the Boston Audio Society website which the quote is usually attributed and could find no info. The Obituary states "Daniel was known to give advice to those in the audio field: “If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you've measured the wrong thing.” It still doesn't reference a source for this. It is much more difficult to find something that doesn't exist. At this point I suspect that Mr. Von Recklinghausen is spinning in has grave at the damage an unsourced quote has done to the field of Audio Engineering.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 4,255
- Likes
- 5,403
To criticise him today for saying that when he said it, would be a case of 'presentism'.
But an engineer who said that today would be generally ignorant of audio science and well deserving of strong criticism. Unfortunately there is no shortage of such engineers today.
The whole premise of 'good' in the typically-cited work, which is great and insightful work IMO, is that a speaker exists solely to reproduce the material as faithfully as possible. Alternatively, if one is not concerned about a strictly-academic exact reproduction of given material, then the purpose of a speaker can be simply to be enjoyable to listen to is a perfectly valid purpose. Pepsi always wins/won the Pepsi Challenge as well but folks still ultimately drink Coke.
We humans are interesting creatures. I equally love and enjoy my speakers that 'measure well' and 'measure not as well'.
We humans are interesting creatures. I equally love and enjoy my speakers that 'measure well' and 'measure not as well'.
Similar threads
- Poll
