Measurements, Listening, and What Matters in Audio from The Absolute Sound.

[Blumlein 88]

A short point counterpoint. Point was written by REG, Robert E. Greene. His part was surprisingly reasonable, rational and his thoughts from a career in the audio business.

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/measurements-listening-and-what-matters-in-audio/

Robert Harley's counterpoint is an embarrasment. RH is such a ridiculous clown at this point.

 

[dc655321]

IMO, the best quote from the comments:

You appear to be equating 'synthesis' with the current politically correct fashion for giving equal weight to all opinions no matter how ill-informed, biased or factually inaccurate. That, with respect, is not progress. Opinions derived from verifiable data can and should be debated at infinitum - or at least until a consensus is reached. Opinions derived from pseudoscience, higher authority or blind belief should be debunked, not debated. Not all opinions are equal.

Sums up my thoughts nicely too...

 

[Inner Space]

I thought Greene's contribution was excellent. He's working his way toward saying there are only two crucial factors: microphones in a room, then loudspeakers in a room. What links them together is not all that big of a deal. That's my conclusion too, after 50 years in audio for fun at home and money at work. On the home end, I think we'll see recognition that the loudspeakers and the room are conceptually one thing that can't be separated. On the studio end, I hope thoughtful miking comes back into fashion before all the old geezers who know how to do it are gone.

 

[Emlin]

I think that the electrons dance along with my mood. So that's why the music sounds different. Obvious, really.

 

[Emlin]

I thought Greene's contribution was excellent. He's working his way toward saying there are only two crucial factors: microphones in a room, then loudspeakers in a room. What links them together is not all that big of a deal. That's my conclusion too, after 50 years in audio for fun at home and money at work. On the home end, I think we'll see recognition that the loudspeakers and the room are conceptually one thing that can't be separated. On the studio end, I hope thoughtful miking comes back into fashion before all the old geezers who know how to do it are gone.

It's transducers, all the way down.

 

[Deleted member 19195]

A good reminder of why I don't bother reading Harley or his website.

 

[Sal1950]

A short point counterpoint. Point was written by REG, Robert E. Greene. His part was surprisingly reasonable, rational and his thoughts from a career in the audio business.

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/measurements-listening-and-what-matters-in-audio/

Robert Harley's counterpoint is an embarrasment. RH is such a ridiculous clown at this point.

I read that last month too and at the time I wondered if it wasn't a set-up. Seems like the hardcore subjectives at TAS and Stereophile have been getting very twitchy and nervous lately. Ever since Jim Austin took over at Stereophile the majority of page one As We See It editorials have been on some form of subjective-vs-objective, ears only-vs-measurement, topics and finding ways to build up their positions. This month (Dec) Jim talks about an accurate system vs one that is emotionally satisfying. A month or two back he went on about why Stereophile has John Atkinson "still" doing measurements. In a way it sounded to me like he was trying to justify to the hard core subjectives why John still had a job there and why he hadn't got rid of the heretic yet. It just seems to me that some of the believers are questioning their faith and the honcos at both magazines are rounding up the wagons.
Then there was the upheaval at CA, now known as Audiophile Style (am I the only one that saw an interesting likeness in the new name?) At that time many of us here that had been long term members there, were politely shown the door out of many forums and given a special forum where we were to "only" express our objective thoughts. We had been a bee in owner Chris's side for some time when we would question some of the more shaky beliefs like the sound of digital cables, SATA none the less, and all the rest.
I could go on pointing out examples, but I'm sure I feel a bit of fear passing through the subjective's cult. Now I have an opinion why they appear to be getting twitchy and nervous, and I don't really want to mention it, but as I watch the membership numbers here surge like the covid virus in New York, there somehow seems to be a connection.
Just cause I'm paranoid doesn't mean no one is watching us. ?

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Personally I don't worry about what the subjectivists think. To my mind, they think the way they do to avoid cognitive dissonance over their purchase of MIT speaker cables instead of Amazon stock in the '90s.

 

[Doodski]

Personally I don't worry about what the subjectivists think. To my mind, they think the way they do to avoid cognitive dissonance over their purchase of MIT speaker cables instead of Amazon stock in the '90s.

Hey! Easy. I made thousands of MIT cables destined for retail shelves in the 80's...lol Ordered in large spools of the MIT cable and case lots of MIT RCA connections, got a super powerful air exhaust hood with a solder pot and sat down and made all of them. I was just starting out and took on the contract. I became very adept at that quickly.

 

[FooYatChong]

Archimago noticed too: "Now as for Robert Harley's "counterpoint". Oh my... Surely Harley's ramblings cannot be the last words on this topic because clearly there are issues!"

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/11/on-measurements-listening-and-what.html

 

[Chrispy]

Yeah, just checked that out at archimago's blog. Harley is the crazy grandfather to audio silliness....

 

[Colonel7]

Focusing on fundamentals based on sound principles and evidence-based science? Dangerous thoughts like that deserve an admonishing intro and a counterpoint. Thought I was reading Animal Farm again or REG would be offered a cup of hemlock for corrupting the youth.

On that note, those types of publications are circling the wagons, or maybe more like hermits in caves slowly dying out. Let's face it, the Audiophile capital A that the cater to is an old man (and I'm certainly not young myself). Outrageous prices on questionable equipment for capital A types are going up bc there is less of the demographic buyer pool. Sites like this separate the wheat from the chaff for many of all ages and younger generations are more comfortable with tech and the digital world--gaming gear and tvs have influences the spec race. We can obtain great performing audio equipment at just about every price level now. On the other end, the As are a dying breed because of the innovators dilemma. All kinds of cheap powered speakers that sync and can play any song you can think of by uttering a phrase is good enough for a huge number of people. Plus the headphone and earbud thing. Despite Harleys dismissive tone in the intro and using his example, I'd bet mp3 through airpods pro sounds better than a lot of charlatany 50k systems playing vinyl or even lossless that his own articles have hyped.

 

[pozz]

Robert Harley's books are terrible. Not even worth a laugh.

I love the way Peter Aczel made fun of him in the Audio Critic.

 

[Hipper]

I can only go by my experience and that sides with Robert Greene. Measurements principally of frequency response can show the way to major improvements. That's because for the last fourteen years or more I have been measuring (not always very well!) and responding to those measurements - room treatment etc..

However there is a part of my experience that tells me that I don't know and can't know everything, and that I don't have the knowledge, skills and tools in a home environment to measure all that's needed. I got small but significant improvements (improvements, not just changes) from actions that I couldn't measure. I'm satisfied, even if others aren't (I know all the arguments about blind testing etc.) that I got improvements (not just changes but improvements) from certain products.

 

[Wes]

I read that last month too and at the time I wondered if it wasn't a set-up. Seems like the hardcore subjectives at TAS and Stereophile have been getting very twitchy and nervous lately. Ever since Jim Austin took over at Stereophile the majority of page one As We See It editorials have been on some form of subjective-vs-objective, ears only-vs-measurement, topics and finding ways to build up their positions. This month (Dec) Jim talks about an accurate system vs one that is emotionally satisfying. A month or two back he went on about why Stereophile has John Atkinson "still" doing measurements. In a way it sounded to me like he was trying to justify to the hard core subjectives why John still had a job there and why he hadn't got rid of the heretic yet. It just seems to me that some of the believers are questioning their faith and the honcos at both magazines are rounding up the wagons.
Then there was the upheaval at CA, now known as Audiophile Style (am I the only one that saw an interesting likeness in the new name?) At that time many of us here that had been long term members there, were politely shown the door out of many forums and given a special forum where we were to "only" express our objective thoughts. We had been a bee in owner Chris's side for some time when we would question some of the more shaky beliefs like the sound of digital cables, SATA none the less, and all the rest.
I could go on pointing out examples, but I'm sure I feel a bit of fear passing through the subjective's cult. Now I have an opinion why they appear to be getting twitchy and nervous, and I don't really want to mention it, but as I watch the membership numbers here surge like the covid virus in New York, there somehow seems to be a connection.
Just cause I'm paranoid doesn't mean no one is watching us. ?

That upheaval was due to knowledgable people being a thorn in Chris the Con's pocketbook, not in his side per se.

His goal is to make a nice fat living from selling ads, etc. on the site. Audiophool drool is what he's selling.


Harley simply doesn't know anything about audio reproduction - either analog or digital.

 

[Chrispy]

Harley simply doesn't know anything about audio reproduction - either analog or digital.

Other than the obvious increase in quality with price?

 

[Sal1950]

That upheaval was due to knowledgable people being a thorn in Chris the Con's pocketbook, not in his side per se.

Yea, we were well aware of the financial motivations. Same motivations run through the entire Hi End media, print, webbased, and what have you.

Harley simply doesn't know anything about audio reproduction - either analog or digital.

I wouldn't say he doesn't know anything. It's the likes of him and his brethren that have found ways to convince the believers of the most ridiculous pseudoscience claims and all the rest to cloud the brains of what otherwise are normally intelligent people.

As Peter Aczel said some years back,
"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?"

 

[Wes]

I found dozens of errors in Harley's book - significant ones, and clearly the result of a lack of technical understanding of waves, much less digital.

I'm sure he is venial as well.

 

[Chrispy]

I found dozens of errors in Harley's book - significant ones, and clearly the result of a lack of technical understanding of waves, much less digital.

I'm sure he is venial as well.

Why venial?

 

[Wes]

agreeing with Sal