• 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!

John Atkinson's of Stereophile Talks About Measurements

Sgt. Ear Ache

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
1,894
Likes
4,151
Location
Winnipeg Canada
That's not at all what I said. I've attempted to be very specific on what I believe to be the variables in playback that do not have a proper definition for neutrality, so we could have an earnest discussion about this.

What is a correct pink noise reading at your listening position? Are you suggesting this should be flat across the frequency spectrum? Or suggesting this should be a specific tilted response?

what does an un-colored pink noise spectrum look like? Is it flat or is it sloped? That will answer your question.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO

dshreter

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Messages
794
Likes
1,226
what does an un-colored pink noise spectrum look like? Is it flat or is it sloped? That will answer your question.
I don’t know which is why I asked. I have no problem pointing that out.
 

Wes

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 5, 2019
Messages
3,843
Likes
3,788
... What do most concert halls do to the sound? ....
... the further away you get from the musicians, the FR tilts more downward. ....

Generally true, but depends on how many women in front of you have feathers or other sound diffusing devices and comb filters mounted on their hats
 
Last edited:

rbradshaw

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
24
Likes
42
The problem is that he recommends everything. Have you seen a video where he outright rejects a product as I do? You don't. If it is given to him or makes up the content for the daily video to get more subscribers, it gets a positive review.

This is why I said he has no audio compass. Nothing to tell him the truth about audio products. By shunning measurements and not having critical listening skills, he recommend any and all audio products.

If he was going to recommend a $50 anything, he should show reliable data of comparing one setup to a number of other alternatives. That is not what is done.

And then there is the bit about "here is a great $100 DAC but wait, it is not as good as the $1000. Mind you, it is a great DAC. But it is missing that something that the $1000 one has." Let me know if you have seen him say the $100 cleans the floor with the $1000 one he has already reviewed. I have watched a lot of his videos but this is not what you are going to see from him.

Steve's asset is that he has a friendly tone and hence is likely to be trusted with what he says. That, however, has nothing to do with whether a speaker or amp is good or not.

Reminds of making a few dishes from a cooking show on TV. In every case the food tasted terrible. But boy, the show made it seem tasty due to the presentation. One was an Indian curry where you put the spices in at the end and just warmed up the dish. Ah, that made it quick to make but boy, who has heard of Indian curry being about dumping spices in a dish and just warming it?

i get that.... he did hate on the new Focal Choras. And he has hated on the Benchmark AHB2 just because it measures so well which I think is a bit weird. In our culture, being negative usually gets more attention so I’m not sure the happy go lucky approach is entirely self serving. I think his point of view is there is no good or bad.... just different... if you’re looking for real advice, most people should look elsewhere. if you’re looking for someone who shares enthusiasm for the hobby then he’s a pretty good ambassador. He didn’t have to have John Atkinson on his channel. He didn’t have to have John shatter every nonsense idea he proposed. He also didn’t have to share the questions ahead of time so John could respond with extremely well thought out answers... I don’t know the man, but I would guess he’s a genuinely good person that has a point of view which is a bit antiquated.
 

b1daly

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
210
Likes
358
I know comments about “even though I am wrong because I still love my terrible measuring device sounds” are meant somewhat ironically, the irony is not necessary.

Generally, it is not possible for an individual’s subjective opinion that something sounds “good” (to them) or “bad” to be wrong. Same with the opinion that gear X sounds “better” than gear Y.

Even in the case when people perceive differences in sound quality between two pieces when measurements show no difference in objective sonic performance, it is not the case that they are “imagining” those sonic differences.

For example, if gear X comes with a high price, outstanding build quality and visual impact, compared to sonically identical but cheap ugly gear Y, it will usually “sound better” in sighted testing.

The experience of listening combines more senses than just hearing, and our hearing is “biased” by visual and other “out of band” factors. This is a real effect.

Hearing perception is highly variable, and even repeated listenings of exactly the same source will ”sound different.”

The bad reputation of sighted listening tests comes from the historical misuse of such tests to characterize the objective audio performance of audio equipment. What demonstrated this was the many examples of listener’s, “golden ears” or not, inability to distinguish between equipment in double blind testing.

There are only two reasons for justifiably claiming that better measuring speakers “sound better” than competing models.

The first is that listening tests show that there is a strong correlation between listener preferences and speakers with certain objective measurements.

The second is that these correlations persist across listener types and genres of music, and are repeatable.

This does not support an assertion that a speaker “sounds better” than another. The relationship between listener preference and ”quality” needs to be more carefully defined.

With signal processing equipment like amps and converters, where objective sonic performance is easier to measure and simpler, the idea that equipment that is “more accurate” in objective signal measurement is “better” is likewise in need of thoughtful qualification.

If before a test you set a rule that we are going to set a criteria to be measured against, for example lowest THD+N , then we can declare a winner.

One thorn-in-side of this ill-defined conception is that much audio gear (non-speaker) is sonically indistinguishable in listening tests.

This precludes the kind of disciplined preference testing from being performed like was done for speakers.

It’s incredible to me to read comments from readers deciding to get rid of equipment they previously thought sounded just great after reading one of Amir’s reviews!

This is overshooting the mark.

Manufacturers, audio pros, or others with interest in objective audio performance (like nut-jobs involved in “competitive car audio”:) will have concerns above and beyond those of everyday users, or even “audiophiles.”

There is one area where I do think there is qualified value in having high objective performance on something like and amp of DAC for consumers, which is the psychological benefit of knowing that any perceived deficiencies in a listening experience are not attributable to the performance of that gear.

Overcoming this requires careful studies on blinded listener testing.

Such studies tend not to get far, because when it becomes obvious that the listers cannot distinguish between two pieces of equipmen, the more interesting competitive question of which is “better” becomes moot.

This is somewhat of a “hot topic” on ASR discussion when it comes to the performance of class D amps, because of their high levels of noise and distortion out of the audio band.

There has been some interesting discussion about whether class D amps might be unstable with certain loads, but this so far seems purely theoretical.

Controlled, blinded listening tests that showed well class D amps to be sonically indistinguishable from comparably spec’d class AB amps could put this question to rest.

This would allow other practical considerations lIke price, heat, efficiency, size, warranty, reliability, and all around fitness for purpose to come to the fore.
 

Billy Budapest

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2019
Messages
1,812
Likes
2,681
No, because you can easily buy something that is not terrible for the money.
There are many examples of products with SOTA measurements that cost around $99. Certainly under $199. It’s really started exploding over the last two years or so. It’s really a great time for audio.
 

Snarfie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
1,169
Likes
926
Location
Netherlands
Ah, but that gets us back to the point I made earlier wrt how our ears adapt. What I'm suggesting is that people shouldn't necessarily give in to their subjective preference of any target curve. I think people should examine WHY they would prefer to have a slope that isn't neutral. I believe that most people, were they to live with and listen to good, neutral sound for even a fairly short time they would adapt and start to prefer that neutral signature. That's what I'm finding for myself. I just find that getting a neutral, un-colored sound just brings such amazing balance and clarity - as I said way back it's like every single element in the recording occupies it's own space and you can choose to focus on it and it's right there for you. I'm finding it quite amazing. Our ears learn to live with what we give them and before too long we believe that's what they want to hear. But I'm starting to believe that a neutral sound signature affords the best sound potential...I aim for that and my ears are adapting, and quickly learning to prefer that.
A neutrale or flat sound signatures is offent not the most spectaculair experience as you said you have to adapt to this new found sound. Lots of people are after a spectaculair or laid back sound i suspect that's one of the reasons subs and target curvers like Harman are populair.
 
Last edited:

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
2,999
Location
Southern California
Steve G? In his videos he recommended tons of super-budget gear starting from $30 amps and $75 speakers.
Steve G? In his videos he recommended tons of super-budget gear starting from $30 amps and $75 speakers.
I don’t like that he believes it’s wrong to pair great $500 speakers with $15,000 upstream equipment - he believes in price matched equipment.
 

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
2,999
Location
Southern California
No audio system will ever be as good as the sound in a concert hall, but that is no reason to increase the difference unnecessarily. I have always preferred a neutral and transparent representation, and that is what I have increasingly managed to have. My first step in the seventies was a good one: Quad ESL57 speakers with Quad amplification. The biggest improvement after that was the arrival of the CD. With that, and a by now completely transparent chain of digital sources and electronics (including quite powerful and clean amplification) all that remains are the speakers and their interaction with the room. With modern Quad stats supported by a sub I think I have collected about the best hardware of what is practically possible in a domestic environment. Apart from adding a second sub my current effort goes into measurement and equalization to achieve the best in-room response, and the benefits are measurable and audible (there is no contradiction between the two). Getting as close as possible to the original sound with a neutral and transparent system is truly enjoyable: you are listening to the music rather than an audio system. I prefer my music in broad daylight rather than candle light.
And these days the good news is that most of this does not even have to be particularly expensive. Really good speakers still are, but precisely budget speakers have also shown tremendous technical improvements. We live in a golden age, so it is weird to see so much expensive snake oil gear.
and yet I prefer my stereo to the typical rock concert venue which has terrible acoustics.
 

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,621
Likes
2,999
Location
Southern California
All the audio review industry works this way. There are no negative reviews, period. Manufacturers advertise and pay them to review. If the reviewers don't like something, they simply do not publish anything about it and privately give the manufacturer a feedback. Or often reviewers say that they only ask samples of products they heard in a show and liked, or that someone tipped them that a given product is awesome, or from a brand he knows and trusts, etc. That is what I read them answering time and again.
You learn to read between the lines, for example: “this speaker requires careful component matching to avoid sounding too etched, use it with tubes...” How often have you read some variation of that?
 

audiophile

Active Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
177
Likes
140
So, given a baseline quality system - one that can produce a flat, audibly undistorted signal - and a set of speakers or cans that can put out a reasonably flat signal from 40hz-20khz, and a bit of EQ to get even closer to neutral...I'll let my ears adapt to that rather than to a sound that is colored or altered in some way by the system.
Have you measured your ears' frequency response and adjusted EQ to compensate, while also taking Fletcher-Munson equal loudness contours into account? If you didn't then what you hear is far from neutral sound. Actually, even if you did you will not hear exactly what the mastering engineer heard in his studio and considered "neutral", since his ears will measure differently from yours.
 

audiophile

Active Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
177
Likes
140
The problem is that he recommends everything. Have you seen a video where he outright rejects a product as I do? You don't. If it is given to him or makes up the content for the daily video to get more subscribers, it gets a positive review.
Popular reviewers like Steve are offered a huge amount of gear to review. Having limited time he picks carefully and avoids complete rubbish. (Frankly, there is not that much very bad gear on the market, most of it sounds at least decent) His reviews are subjective and there is no black and white in subjective audio. Steve may not like a speaker that seemed too bright to him, but other people in their systems may prefer that kind of sound. So he tries to present a balanced view, talking about positive and not so positive aspects of what he heard. Of course, Steve's reviews are not ASR, their goal is only to highlight some good gear (in his subjective opinion), and I heard him saying multiple times that people should not trust the reviews blindly but go listen for themselves to make the final judgement.

If he was going to recommend a $50 anything, he should show reliable data of comparing one setup to a number of other alternatives. That is not what is done.
He is a subjective reviewer and works for a different crowd, who prefers subjective impressions to measurements. So why require him to do ASR thing, he will then lose all his subscribers and his job :)

Let me know if you have seen him say the $100 cleans the floor with the $1000 one he has already reviewed.
One example that jumps to my mind is when he found Denafrips' $700 DAC to sound better than his previous favorite Border Patrol, which costs twice as much.

Ah, that made it quick to make but boy, who has heard of Indian curry being about dumping spices in a dish and just warming it?
You're being unscientific here. Any papers/research/DBT on spices tasting objectively better the way you prefer them? :cool:

If you can read between the lines there's often negative comments but they are hidden.
I agree, even in Guttenberg's reviews you can see when he really likes the product and when not so much.
 

DuxServit

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 21, 2018
Messages
428
Likes
508
With respect, not encouraging people to visit shows or stores is just ridiculous. People need to hear systems and components of all types, prices and pedigrees to be able to make decisions on what they need and want from their investment. ASR in no way tells people how gear sounds to them.

I certainly can’t prevent people from attending shows or stores—but I also can voice my opinion to them personally about the degree of BS in the consumer audio market. Freedom of speech goes in both directions.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,375
Likes
234,487
Location
Seattle Area
Popular reviewers like Steve are offered a huge amount of gear to review. Having limited time he picks carefully and avoids complete rubbish.
Not at all. He reviews gear that is complete rubbish. Reason is that he has no method to determine what is or is not good. Everything can sound "good" if you play well recorded music on it. There is no critical listening ability or objective measurements are involved in what he does. All that is backing his opinion is that he used to sell hifi for many years and has been writing the same kind of review for many years. That teaches him about the industry but doesn't give him any tool to find the bad audio product, from the good one.

I have sat with a large group of high-end audio retailers in the same blind test and find them they can't tell whatsoever what is colored about the sound they are hearing. Research shows that such people don't have good listening abilities. From Sean Olive's research:

ListenerPerformance.jpg


Why would you put any trust in what he has to say where he can't even critically evaluate plainly audible differences in speaker sound?

This is a self-selecting industry. Someone can't call themselves a doctor and dispense medicine. Yet we think it is perfectly OK for someone to dispense the same advice about audio with no proven ability to have any kind of good listening ability, or judgement about the design of a product.

Mind you, I enjoy listening to him and watch a ton of his reviews. It is just that it is plainly obvious that there is no real skill involved in much of what he talks about.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,375
Likes
234,487
Location
Seattle Area
One example that jumps to my mind is when he found Denafrips' $700 DAC to sound better than his previous favorite Border Patrol, which costs twice as much.
Ah Border Patrol. Here is the title of that video: "A crazy good but not crazy expensive DAC"


A tube power supply in a DAC powered by an old and obsolete DAC chip. Tell me why you would believe such a DAC is "crazy good." And how it went from "crazy good" to not being as good as Danfrips now?

He says this in his written review:
1579674003337.png


Put a tube in anything and all of a sudden the sound becomes "sweet." The bloody tube is not even in the audio path but it must be making the DAC sound sweet.

Back to your statement, this is what he said in his written review:
1579674251882.png


What is that comparison for heaven's sake? One has a sweet sound but the other is pure? One has good soundstage depth but the other has clarity?

And oh, veils were removed as if we have not heard that before.

All of this is word salad made to make sense to reader/viewer but in reality has no substance behind it. It is fantasy description of audio based on faulty evaluations.

Regardless, it is not the example I asked for. As usual, these reviewers never say what they said was great before is now crap.
 

JoachimStrobel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 27, 2019
Messages
518
Likes
303
Location
Germany
In room Olive suggests a 1 db/octave slope so that from 20 hz to 20 khz you get 10 db drop. The old B&K curve suggested flat to 200 hz and 6db down from there to 20 khz. Which works out to about .9 db/octave.

In doing Room EQ, off of measurements of in room response, the 6 db between 200 hz and 20 khz is pretty reliable as sounding right. Whether to stay flat below 200hz, or have 3 db of up tilt or something in between seems to vary from room to room. Some uptilt in the low end works if you've gotten a smooth response down there. If it is has peaks, it will sound like too much and keeping it flat below 200 hz works out better in my experience.
I posted this elsewhere, here it comes again: The preferred room curve. Only trained people like a downward dip, the others do not. The famous downward dip comes from an average of trained and non-trained people. Similar things can be said about the bass. That room curve thingy becomes very strange. I would love to hear the definition of “trained” vs “non-trained”.
FF262D6A-EFBE-4D22-B982-7675A22CE8FA.jpeg
 

Putter

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 23, 2019
Messages
493
Likes
771
Location
Albany, NY USA
A random observation related to Stereophile I used to read with some amusement speaker reviews from the late Robert Reina who did try, bless his heart to compare different speakers in a similar price range although obviously not blind. You could guarantee that the more expensive speaker would get a better recommendation UNLESS it was no longer available. If they were about the same price there would be enough word salad to make it difficult to see a difference. Don't get me wrong, like SG he recommended decent speakers, but similarly he never seemed to hate any speaker.
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
I wonder if those untrained listeners would state the same preferences if they were forced to listen for an hour or longer before specifying. I find that I'm often quite enamored of a bass-boosted, sparkly highs presentation for a few minutes... my older Klipsch were this way and my Polks (if used on axis) are as well. After more than a couple songs however... they need some toeing out or the fatigue starts to set in.

My guess is that "trained listeners" aren't just more familiar with frequency differences and how they effect presentation... they've also listened to more and for longer than their untrained counterparts... at least that would be my guess.
 
Top Bottom