Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[voodooless]

We are fortunate enough that what you say is quite wrong. Here is our top contributors: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?members/&key=most_messages

Plenty of experts in topics we discuss in there. Certainly more than what you bring to the party.

To be fair, we need a bit more statistics to establish this. How many % of all post do these top 20 make? I’d be surprised it it’s 1%. That’s still a relatively large amount obviously.

But really, I’m just honored to be I’m in the top 20 (for now)

 

[antcollinet]

Yes, you can.

This has to be deliberate.

I am nomming the popcorn right now. Lol.

 

[dfuller]

There are some tests for dynamics but I don't like them. They make the smallest attempt at audibility assessments. As you know I listen instead as that is so much easier but admittedly, not precise or very comparative.

Yeah, this is the bit I'm trying to figure out. I've heard a lot of speakers that sound amazing at lower volumes but as soon as you push them they don't start crackling or anything but they just get, for lack of a better term, messy sounding. So how do you quantify that in a meaningful way? It's not really distortion (certainly not audibly distorted).

 

[killdozzer]

I'm really starting to think "transients" is the top buzzword for the non-audiophool. People are starting to ascribe all sorts of properties to transients. Often, I'll notice a huge amount of play on semantics with this word.

 

[Music1969]

To answer the thread title question:

The truth lies somewhere between the 2 extremes of "nothing" and "everything" - ie. something.

 

[ahofer]

To answer the thread title question:

The truth lies somewhere between the 2 extremes of "nothing" and "everything" - ie. something.

But can everything audible be measured? (my suggested, falsifiable, improved, substitute thread title)

 

[voodooless]

Yeah, this is the bit I'm trying to figure out. I've heard a lot of speakers that sound amazing at lower volumes but as soon as you push them they don't start crackling or anything but they just get, for lack of a better term, messy sounding. So how do you quantify that in a meaningful way? It's not really distortion (certainly not audibly distorted).

There may be many reasons for this next to audible distortion. The room comes into play more at louder volumes, so off-axis response may be more important. Also, the perceived frequency response will change due to the loudness curves. This alters the tonal balance and may no longer be to your liking.

 

[GXAlan]

A point about measurements: we can run hundreds of audio tests if we wanted. And if someone identified something we are not measuring, we can trivially create a measurement for that as well. I only run half a dozen tests in general because more doesn't do more to quantify how linear a device is beyond very end of the diminishing returns tail.

To add to Amir’s comments, the strongest proponents of “subjective hand-waving” for audio, are often the ones who can afford fancy tweaks and audio accessories.

What is underestimated is how much *time* it takes to run measurements in a controlled fashion. If Amir ran hundreds of measurements, you would get only one review a month.

However, the cost to entry for doing your own measurements at home is very easy. So instead of buying a $500 power cord, or $5000 line conditioner, buy a good ADC like the E1DA Cosmos or similar.

Software like Multitone Tester and DeltaWave can help you measure what you think you are hearing.

The community here is supportive and can help even the most subjectivist listeners try to figure out that brand new test that measures what you think you can hear.

 

[killdozzer]

There ac be many reasons for this next to audible distortion. The room comes into play more at louder volumes, so off-axis response may be more important. Also, the perceived frequency response will change due to the loudness curves. This alters the tonal balance and may no longer be to your liking.

And a lot of beaming comes into play... Louder is never just louder. The speaker behaves differently.

 

[manisandher]

Codecs use (over)lapped transforms to obviate the need for windowing (they do use windowing but for another purpose). The general term is "MDCT" which stands for modified discrete cosine transforms. The "M" part is the overlapped operation. it is a clever scheme to remove aliasing artifacts in time domain. The other nice thing about the transform is that it produces half as much data.

There are also codecs that are "bit exact" meaning they have inverse transforms that generate identical results, using integer transforms no less.

Net, net, yes we do go from time to frequency and back to time without creating artifacts due to that operation.

Thanks. That's really useful.

 

[antcollinet]

fight fire with fire. Live by the sword... No, I hold several advanced degrees in science but not directly related to audio products. Anatomy and physiology of hearing, yes. So I believe my question is valid and based on expertise. Do need me to cite some studies on the effects of aging on hearing?

No one is denying that hearing capability varies between individuals - but as has been stated the careful research of the last decades tells us where the right tail of that distribution ends. In other words, we know the limits beyond which even goldenest eared of humanity cannot go.

 

[birdog1960]

I

No one is denying that hearing capability varies between individuals - but as has been stated the careful research of the last decades tells us where the right tail of that distribution ends. In other words, we know the limits beyond which even goldenest eared of humanity cannot go.

get that. But what about older tarnished ears of which many enthusiasts are now endowed? It would appear that many would require lesser capabilities to achieve transparency or whatever audiophile nirvana is? Is there a solid, agreed upon definition (gold standard) for what a perfect system or component measures at?

 

[dfuller]

There may be many reasons for this next to audible distortion. The room comes into play more at louder volumes, so off-axis response may be more important. Also, the perceived frequency response will change due to the loudness curves. This alters the tonal balance and may no longer be to your liking.

At the risk of bringing hell down on me, the worst offenders were Genelecs. I swear it must have something to do with their port design choices, because despite being nowhere near the limits of the speaker the low end turned to mush. It wasn't even like I was really activating the room - I can hear when that happens as a seemingly omnidirectional pressure in my ears, and it's only at certain frequencies. I genuinely want to know what measurements would reflect this because this is one of those "if they measure the same and sound different, you're measuring the wrong thing" kind of things.

 

[voodooless]

At the risk of bringing hell down on me, the worst offenders were Genelecs. I swear it must have something to do with their port design choices, because despite being nowhere near the limits of the speaker the low end turned to mush. It wasn't even like I was really activating the room - I can hear when that happens as a seemingly omnidirectional pressure in my ears, and it's only at certain frequencies. I genuinely want to know what measurements would reflect this because this is one of those "if they measure the same and sound different, you're measuring the wrong thing" kind of things.

They have limiters and thermal control. That can be quite audible.

 

[antcollinet]

I

get that. But what about older tarnished ears of which many enthusiasts are now endowed? It would appear that many would require lesser capabilities to achieve transparency or whatever audiophile nirvana is? Is there a solid, agreed upon definition (gold standard) for what a perfect system or component measures at?

Well you seem to be arguing for different standards for different people. That obviously won't work.

If you want to know your own limits you can test for them - there are many online tests that will allow you to test your ability to hear (for example) lossy codecs compared with lossless - or different levels of distortion. At age 60, I know I am far from the extreme limits of human capability. If I see flat FR, and Sinad better than 90, I'm confident that for me the kit is better than I can hear.

However, there is plenty of kit available that is transparent to everyone (when we are talking about electronics) - so we don't need to worry about individual variation - just choose something from the green/blue areas of the charts here, and select from there based on features/price.

 

[dfuller]

They have limiters and thermal control. That can be quite audible.

No evidence of the speakers hitting their limiters, but I agree, limiters are quite audible. Even the least audible ones are not exactly subtle.

 

[birdog1960]

Well you seem to be arguing for different standards for different people. That obviously won't work.

If you want to know your own limits you can test for them - there are many online tests that will allow you to test your ability to hear (for example) lossy codecs compared with lossless - or different levels of distortion. At age 60, I know I am far from the extreme limits of human capability. If I see flat FR, and Sinad better than 90, I'm confident that for me the kit is better than I can hear.

However, there is plenty of kit available that is transparent to everyone (when we are talking about electronics) - so we don't need to worry about individual variation - just choose something from the green/blue areas of the charts here, and select from there based on features/price.

Thank you. But blue and green categories would seem to indicate relative differences in transparency or even, dare I say, subjective analysis. Are all in those categories equally transparent? Is blue the gold standard? Best possible or best available after which no more performance measures are audible?

 

[Music1969]

But can everything audible be measured?

Hence why I hinted measurements are "something" not "everything"

 

[GXAlan]

Thank you. But blue and green categories would seem to indicate relative differences in transparency or even, dare I say, subjective analysis. Are all in those categories equally transparent? Is blue the gold standard? Best possible or best available after which no more performance measures are audible?

Blue is just based on a 1kHz at usually 4V output SINAD measured from one sample.

Audibility thresholds of amp and DAC measurements

Introduction A recurring theme on ASR is whether or not the various measured qualities of the devices are audible. In this post, I'll present some clear and visual thresholds for when those imperfections can be considered a potentially audible concern. I will not explain the basics of amp/DAC...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Recap of thresholds
Lenient
Dynamic range, linearity: 96 dB
THD, IMD: -66 dBFS / 0.05%
Noise: -85 dBFS / 0.005%
SINAD: 85 dB
Crosstalk: -60 dBFS
Jitter: -110 dBFS, -100 dBFS around the main tone
Frequency response: ±0.5 dB
Channel balance: 1 dB
Output impedance: 2 ohms

Strict
Dynamic range, linearity, SINAD: 120 dB
THD, IMD, noise, crosstalk, jitter: -120 dBFS / 0.0001%
Frequency response, channel balance: ±0.1 dB
Output impedance: 0.16 ohms

 

[antcollinet]

Thank you. But blue and green categories would seem to indicate relative differences in transparency or even, dare I say, subjective analysis. Are all in those categories equally transparent? Is blue the gold standard? Best possible or best available after which no more performance measures are audible?

The charts are just a ranking of Sinad. And good Sinad alone does not guarantee transparency. However, the trend is that devices that have good Sinad also perform well in the other measurements. The green and blue areas are the good to excellent (Sinad) ranges. I'm currently listeing to a DAC (actually an external soundblaster device) at the bottom of the orange range - and it sounds fine to me.

For the gold standard of what measurements need to reach for absolute transparency, this thread gives you what you need to know.

Audibility thresholds of amp and DAC measurements

Introduction A recurring theme on ASR is whether or not the various measured qualities of the devices are audible. In this post, I'll present some clear and visual thresholds for when those imperfections can be considered a potentially audible concern. I will not explain the basics of amp/DAC...

www.audiosciencereview.com

So - go for green or blue, check the other measurements in the review against the limits (or your own limits if you've tested yourself) and after that select on features/price.