Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

[ahofer]

I think the only conclusion we can draw is that “trust your ears” often means “trust all your senses in combination”, or just “trust your intuition”.

 

[Gilvan]

I cannot understand people who dispute against clear and scientific done measurements, they instead keep prisoner from their illusions.
Seem that people don't have very well functional brains ...
To summarize , i remember Mark Twain, more than a century ago :

 

[Pearljam5000]

I cannot understand people who dispute against clear and scientific done measurements, they instead keep prisoner from their illusions.
Seem that people don't have very well functional brains ...
To summarize , i remember Mark Twain, more than a century ago :

View attachment 473323

How smart is it to buy speakers based only on perfect measurements and then be disappointed by their sound?

 

[Purité Audio]

One I suppose may not enjoy really transparent loudspeakers preferring instead an effects box.
Keith

 

[Sal1950]

How smart is it to buy speakers based only on perfect measurements and then be disappointed by their sound

Genelec mostly measure near perfect, have you been disappointed by them ?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Genelec mostly measure near perfect, have you been disappointed by them ?

No
But I've heard other excellent measuring monitors (that I won't mention) that I liked a lot less

 

[MattHooper]

I think I've demoed one speaker before purchase in 40 years, I'm sure I'm far from the only one.

I’ve always agreed that, with some education, buying gear just on measurements (including loudspeakers ) is very sensible for many people. Certainly if one has the ASR mindset. It’s worked out well for plenty of audiophiles (that as I understand, it was mostly how it was done for a long time, including for any audiophiles with subscriptions to stereo review and audio magazine, heavily measurement oriented),

But a lot depends on one’s mindset and particular interests, etc. Buying purely on measurements simply isn’t appealing for everybody.

I think people mostly demo because:

a) it's how you're 'supposed' to choose equipment
b) They irrationally don't trust measurements or don't understand them.

For my part, I essentially rely on measurements when choosing gear that I want to be neutral and audibly transparent.
For instance, a solid state amplifier or my Benchmark preamp. I just need to know that it is audibly transparent (pretty easy to achieve with solid state) and has the proper specs, and I’m good to go.

When it comes to electronic gear that might sound audibly different, for instance, tube amplifiers, I prefer if there are measurements available. I especially like to see if they meet their power specs. (as Steteophile measurements have shown for many years, plenty of amplifiers do not hit their power rating, and this seems especially rampant with tube amplifiers). Beyond that, I prefer to hear a tube amplifier in my system because I can’t perfectly predict how it will sound with a variety of different loudspeakers that I may own. And I do enjoy the exploration and surprise factor that comes with this.

When it comes to loudspeakers, I get the gist of how the measurements relate to the sound of a speaker, but loudspeakers can still measure in complex ways, and I personally cannot perfectly predict how some loudspeakers will sound from their measurements. I would rule some of them out when I see some frequency response deviation so large that I know it’s going to be audible in that area and I don’t want that. I’m looking for something that sounds balanced to me and not obviously exaggerating or missing anything.

On the other hand there can be a little zigs and zags in a frequency response and I can’t necessarily predict whether I’m going notice them in a way that sticks out enough to bother me. Even among people who are very used to measuring speakers, you’ll find them saying “ I saw this in the measurements but in listening it didn’t really seem to bother me or stick out.” (Erin of Erin’s Audio Corner for instance said as much in his recent review of the Mo-Fi V10 towers - relatively neutral response with some frequency, deviations that he overall didn’t notice when listening).

Also, I have found things to enjoy and loudspeakers that measured wonky (even if I might not want to own that loudspeaker).

Plus, I am ultra picky about the sound of a loudspeaker I can live with. I’m super sensitive to at least my perception of timbre and that frankly rules out most of loudspeakers I’ve heard. So in my case, I always have to listen to a loudspeaker to know if I’m going to like it enough to want to own it. (and that can include if there’s some nice bias effects that come along with that speaker).

c) There are no measurements available - which should really mean that the speaker should be rejected as an option. It means the manufacturer either did not design with the assistance of measurements or the measurements are bad. Both are fails.

Thats a very ASR thing to write


No problem with you ruling out speakers on those grounds. But for my purposes, I couldn’t disagree more.

I’ve had so many wonderful listening experiences to loudspeakers for which measurements were not available. I would’ve been deprived of some really great loudspeakers if I took that approach.

I don’t have any measurements for my Thiel 2.7 speakers (nor my old Thiel model O2s), but they are among my favourite speakers I’ve ever heard. I don’t ever intend to sell them.

I didn’t know any measurements for the Joseph Audio speakers when I heard them in the store. Didn’t even know much about the brand. I simply fell head over heels from what I heard. I’ve owned them now for years and remain ecstatic with what I hear - they are my endgame speakers. I know how they measure now from Stereophile - but that’s neither here nor there…. because they sound how they sound - seeing the measurements didn’t change how I perceived them - and that’s what I fell for.

So again, I’m very glad I don’t take the attitude of dismissing loudspeakers for which measurements aren’t available.

But of course, I have no objection whatsoever to anybody who takes the alternative approach you suggest.

Cheers

 

[Dumu]

A flat measuring speaker is not going to be flat in any typical room. Without knowing the transfer function of the exact placement in the room, it is not possible to tell from speaker measurements how the speakers would sound in your room. A speaker without any in-built flaws is of course easier to EQ, but might not be the best sounding before EQ.

It takes huge amounts of time and practice to learn to interpret measurements so you can predict what the measured speaker would actually sound. Simple frequency response tells only part of the story. And to be able to predict how the graphs would translate to sound in some other place than your own listening room, starts to be pretty impossible to average person.

So yes, measurements are helpful, but a normal person has to test the speaker in his room to be able to choose the best sounding speaker.

 

[MattHooper]

If measurements were everything and everyone was willing to learn it
Then everyone would buy speakers without even hearing them at all and would just rely on the measurements... indeed

This goes in to the “ if everybody just thought like me, they would think like me” file.

 

[Mart68]

But a lot depends on one’s mindset and particular interests, etc. Buying purely on measurements simply isn’t appealing for everybody.

I know, but the question I replied to was 'If measurements are everything why do people audition?' - and my point was a lot of people don't.

But I generally advise people to do auditions if I'm not very sure about exactly what they are after.

Thats a very ASR thing to write


No problem with you ruling out speakers on those grounds. But for my purposes, I couldn’t disagree more.

I’ve had so many wonderful listening experiences to loudspeakers for which measurements were not available. I would’ve been deprived of some really great loudspeakers if I took that approach.

I think all manufacturers should publish their measurements or say 'we didn't use them' and just stand by that.

If the speaker has an odd FR or some other 'non-canon' attribute they should be able to explain why they designed like that.

It's just transparency.

I hear enough speakers at shows and meets I don't really need to be finding unmeasured speakers to listen to. I'm quite fussy too, not one of those people who can say 'well it has some flaws but it does this so well I can overlook them'.

 

[MattHooper]

I think the only conclusion we can draw is that “trust your ears” often means “trust all your senses in combination”, or just “trust your intuition”.

Yes that is unfortunately, how the phrase
“ trust your ears” is often used in the audiophile world. There was recently a very odd video on YouTube, a hi-fi channel, in which the video was click-baitingly titled:
“ no measurements will tell you how your hi-fi sounds! Trust your ears!”

In the video, the guy first presents all sorts of technical information about how measurements relate to what you’re going to hear in regards to electronics at loudspeakers, as well as ruling out what you’re not going to hear… some legit stuff in there. But then after explaining the relevance of measurements to their Sonic properties, he suddenly does this pivot at the end about how you can’t trust measurements to tell you how something is going to sound! And he defaults to “ so you have to trust your ears”

Here:

When it comes to the fact that I insist on listening to a loudspeaker to decide whether I want to own it, I do not fully trust my ears in the sense of thinking my perception in sighted listening is absolutely reliable. But I have found it fairly reliable (seems to track relatively well when I see the measurements of the loudspeaker).

But I do have plenty of “trust” in my
“ experience” - by that I mean my impressions under sighted conditions, even if they include some bias effects, produces impressions that are extremely reliable.
My perception of the essential characteristics of a loudspeaker do not seem to change over time, including over decades. What can change is my satisfaction. In other words, if I find myself dissatisfied overtime with certain aspects of a loudspeaker, it’s it’s usually not that it discovered something new about its character - that aspect was something I already knew to be the character of that loudspeaker. I can just learn through time living with the loudspeaker whether I can put up with it or not .

 

[MattHooper]

I know, but the question I replied to was 'If measurements are everything why do people audition?' - and my point was a lot of people don't.

But I generally advise people to do auditions if I'm not very sure about exactly what they are after.

I think all manufacturers should publish their measurements or say 'we didn't use them' and just stand by that.

If the speaker has an odd FR or some other 'non-canon' attribute they should be able to explain why they designed like that.

It's just transparency.

I hear enough speakers at shows and meets I don't really need to be finding unmeasured speakers to listen to. I'm quite fussy too, not one of those people who can say 'well it has some flaws but it does this so well I can overlook them'.

I would like to see measurements for all loudspeakers as well, and yes, I think your suspicion for loudspeakers without published measurements is warranted.

 

[Dumu]

If measurements were everything and everyone was willing to learn it
Then everyone would buy speakers without even hearing them at all and would just rely on the measurements...

Do we know about a person who can predict what a pair of speakers would sound like in a room with x dimensions, y furniture and z construction from speaker measurement report? Could that person reliably pick the right sound sample when asked to pick the one that matches the measurements of the speakers and the details of the specified room, from few alternatives from similar rooms and speakers?

 

[Petrushka]

This goes in to the “ if everybody just thought like me, they would think like me” file.

You can be tossed into the vacuum of space…

Or…

You can tell me how much you like my system.

 

[ahofer]

How smart is it to buy speakers based only on perfect measurements and then be disappointed by their sound?

Presumption not in evidence.

Complete measurements for a speaker would include a spinorama, not just FR. That seems to be lost in some of the subsequent comments. I’ve bought two pairs based on Spinorama and I’m not disappointed with either.

 

[Jim Taylor]

This goes in to the “ if everybody just thought like me, they would think like me” file.

I think @Newman was getting at something else.

Take the Mars Rovers, for example. Everything necessary to put them on Mars involved measurements (and astrophysics). Before they were sent to the Red Planet, no one could "audition" them (so to speak).
The work on this mission was done at a distance, and if there were people on that mission who had not been willing to learn the science necessary, the mission would have failed. Everything depended on doing the job "by the numbers" ... and doing it correctly.

It has nothing to do with thinking like the team that was successful. Maybe that was necessary, and maybe it wasn't. The important thing is coming up with the same result.

Success gives testimony to whatever science is necessary to achieve it ... in the space program, in medical surgery, in designing an integrated chip .... or in audio. I think that was Newman's point.

 

[MattHooper]

I think @Newman was getting at something else.

Take the Mars Rovers, for example. Everything necessary to put them on Mars involved measurements (and astrophysics). Before they were sent to the Red Planet, no one could "audition" them (so to speak).
The work on this mission was done at a distance, and if there were people on that mission who had not been willing to learn the science necessary, the mission would have failed. Everything depended on doing the job "by the numbers" ... and doing it correctly.

It has nothing to do with thinking like the team that was successful. Maybe that was necessary, and maybe it wasn't. The important thing is coming up with the same result.

Success gives testimony to whatever science is necessary to achieve it ... in the space program, in medical surgery, in designing an integrated chip .... or in audio. I think that was Newman's point.

Unless Newman revamps his claim, the message in his post was very clear (especially paying attention to his last sentence).

In effect: when it comes to good reasons for buying audio equipment, measurements are everything. You can buy strictly based on (a good set of) measurements.

And if everybody were educated enough to understand how the measurements relate to sound, then, in that case, everybody would purchase their equipment, including loudspeakers, simply based on measurements.

Because of course, in Newman’s world, that’s the only rational thing to do.

That this analysis leaves out plenty of important variables, including the imprecision of our perception and different people’s goals in buying loudspeakers, I think is obvious. (And I think it’s at least implied, combined with Newman’s many other posts, that therefore people would always purchase loudspeakers that measured within certain neutral parameters).

 

[john2017]

Good measurements are a great place to start, but they cannot always tell you how a piece of gear or a set of speakers will perform in your own space. There are times when I bought sight unseen based on decent to great specs and it just did not work well within my system and in my listening space.

 

[Dumu]

And if everybody were educated enough to understand how the measurements relate to sound, then, in that case, everybody would purchase their equipment, including loudspeakers, simply based on measurements.

Is it even realistic to assume someone could learn to interpret speaker measurements to such a degree that they could reliably identify the speaker's sound signature?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Good measurements are a great place to start, but they cannot always tell you how a piece of gear or a set of speakers will perform in your own space. There are times when I bought sight unseen based on decent to great specs and it just did not work well within my system and in my listening space.

Finally someone that thinks like me