JSmith
Master Contributor
Of course it is... SINAD (or THD+N) is not a perceptually correlated metric, it's one measurement based on the scientific principles of electrical signal amplification.Is that science?
JSmith
Of course it is... SINAD (or THD+N) is not a perceptually correlated metric, it's one measurement based on the scientific principles of electrical signal amplification.Is that science?
We are in applied science here. Everything has to have results and not just for the sake of science!Is that science? I'm not supporting any side here, I have no dog in this race. I admire the S in ASR.
I haven’t been a car nerd for about five years, but back when I was paying attention Porsche had a pretty good reputation for reliability—and a great one if you just consider sports cars.That is orthogonal to mission and purpose of my reviews. I only test for performance, not reliability, design unrelated to performance, etc. Those factors by definition cannot enter its performance rating. A Porsche is very fast and handles great. That it is also unreliable doesn't stop auto reviewers from giving high marks for its great "engineering."
Nobody is asking you to ignore reliability. My point with the post was that no one is saying Porsche has lousy engineering because their cars break down. Yes, reliability is important especially when you pay so much for these cars. But as I said, it is orthogonal to the mission and charter of this site.For me, ignoring reliability is missing a huge and critical piece of the engineering puzzle.
You guys keep talking about this "problem." As soon as I review anything, half a dozen people say performance is more than good enough. That anything over 100 dB SINAD doesn't matter, etc. All of this gets said in first page or two of every review. So there is no problem here but people wanting to make some argument disguised as "what is wrong with SINAD."Problem with SINAD is the distortion part.That's what people question all the time.
I have never seen this. But so what if it happens? World of audio is broken at the core in so many levels that you all want to worry about this?And that invalidates the metric in their eyes (ears better),I'll say it again,the vast majority of the small percentage around traditional forums who try to put SINAD in their lives link it directly with SQ.
Ok,let's see it this way.Let's move on for heaven's sake and focus on solving the million things that are wrong with marketing and reviews of products outside.
Who cares? It is an obscure option in a menu that someone here and there plays with.Is it OK to stuff a DAC with distortion and call it "sound color"?Isn't that some of the worst marketing around?
Judging by myself (I sure don't) a few.But vocal few who make a case out of it.Who cares? It is an obscure option in a menu that someone here and there plays with.
Yep, all ASR can do is check technical performance and maybe some engineering aspects.That is orthogonal to mission and purpose of my reviews. I only test for performance, not reliability, design unrelated to performance, etc. Those factors by definition cannot enter its performance rating. A Porsche is very fast and handles great. That it is also unreliable doesn't stop auto reviewers from giving high marks for its great "engineering."
In what way is that silly? If anything I'd say it's silly not recommending stuff because they have "low" SINAD when in reality the noise and distortion is most likely not audible. And I don't see why it would be silly adding Strict and Lenient auditability threshold lines just to be a bit clearer, tbh it's just as silly/unsilly as ranking with those words and colours you have on there now. Because again, that SINAD ranking is _clearly_ a problem for lots of people, of course not for you, me and half of ASR, but for many people it is, so being a bit clearer with a "silly" disclaimer will help everyone.Reluctant about what? Putting silly disclaimers in reviews? Where are those disclaimers in other people's reviews? I have for long put disclaimers in reviews, with net result being cluttering them to no good effect. I have done tutorials which talk about all aspects of the review and that is that. I am not writing a legal agreement to have 12 page fine print on them.
Personally I would argue it the other way…Problem with SINAD is the distortion part.That's what people question all the time.
…
We're saying the same thing,no one argues noise.SNR is a far clearer and useful metric.Personally I would argue it the other way…
As the noise part seems way more obvious.
-60 dB of pure white noise may have the system hissing like a basket of vipers at a Pentecostal revival.
Whereas 50dB SINAD, mainly of some 2nd harmonic, is something that actually can sound very nice.
Noice to the point where it might be preferred by a bunch of people compared to 120dB of SINAD.
But almost no one prefers a hissing speaker/system.
A system with noise around -110 and THD around <= -70 is generally not bad in an amplifier.
Basically SNR is more important to me than SINAD.
Unless the SINAD number has the FFT next to it, which is often the case, it is hard to determine whether the noise or the distortion is the culprit.
And since most speakers have distortion that is way higher than -60 dB it gets to be a bit of stretch to believe that the distortion will be audible.
But the noise is super audible.
A sum can be also very useful for every user to pin-point potential problems without having to interpret the charts.As SINAD is only ranked by ASR it would be preferable to either have a link to an explanation/rationalization of using this metric or a clear definition under or in the chart clearly stating what the number shows (signal fidelity/quality for 1kHz at a specified level) so even noobs can understand what it says.
Still, even then people will think or say that ASR believes 'signal quality = sound quality' and misuse that in order to discredit Amir and ASR.
That can be clarified with a link to a page explaining SINAD with examples and what it can and cannot show and why the metric is not silly to use.
Part of the all important education.
Exactly. They invest in a DAC with an 80 dB SINAD, either don’t hear a difference or think they do because it’s more expensive, and then conclude that the SINAD chart is meaningless and ASR users are misguided.Problem is that people keep testing them and no one can tell them apart from the usual 120dB SINAD.
And that invalidates the metric in their eyes (ears better),I'll say it again,the vast majority of the small percentage around traditional forums who try to put SINAD in their lives link it directly with SQ.
Nobody reading ASR does that because they can get a far better DAC at any price point and feature set. You continue to invent non problems.Exactly. They invest in a DAC with an 80 dB SINAD, either don’t hear a difference or think they do because it’s more expensive, and then conclude that the SINAD chart is meaningless and ASR users are misguided.