Munich Hi-End

[Tks]

Ok, that's your opinion.

Aside from having heard an enormous number of loudspeaker systems over the years, I hear a lot of pro-sound in my work - mixing theaters that cost millions of dollars - and while the pro-sound systems I've heard have their own virtues, none have produced the holographic "musicians seemingly appearing before me" sensation as the MBL speakers did.

Now, you may hear them and may have a different opinion. But well...that'd be your opinion. If someone else has the money and they find no other speaker system hits their buttons like the MBL reference system, then there you go.

Now, that's not to say that I personally don't find lots of the high end pricing to be outrageous. I share a concern about how high end pricing seems on an upward death-spiral. (In fact, I just posted on Stereophile a comment that a new reference speaker seemed likely priced more on "if I don't make it this expensive they won't take me seriously." But, then, I have to admit that what I have spent on my gear, even though none of it is remotely stratospheric, would already be deemed "outrageous" by common folk who don't have a jones for audio gear. And I'm glad I've had the choice to buy what I wanted.

Can we please not converse like infantiles? Obviously that is my opinion. The thing you need to understand is, if the opinion is valid for more folks than another and is follow up with evidence(or the absence of evidence from those making claims to the counter), the point isn't to make it a fact, the point is to demonstrate the reasonable statement holds more credence, especially when applied to the general public. And safe to say, I don't know of a single person who I call as a friend, willing to pay the cost of speakers that transcend the six figure bracket. So yes, it's an opinion, but not all opinions are equal, to the contrary of what you might hear in elementary school "every persons opinion is equally as valid".

Come back to me when you can reproduce this "holographic" effect in all scenarios and settings, or better yet, put it on paper with other people in a 90%+ confidence rating also making the same claim when doing comparative testing to multiple other systems. Otherwise, as Ive said prior, your thoughts on "holographic feels" are perfectly fine for you, and you enjoy it. But just like other ideas, please don't try to explain to me how people ought to treat something intangible if you can't at least quantify it in some way. You leave the door for people to simply bias themselves this way.

That it "sounds better to me" is the reason people generally buy their loudspeakers.

You're not making a point here. You're addressing (like prior) a single sentence which has context you've not included. Please no more witty one-liner replies.

No. It's precisely because subjective perception *doesn't* have an equal measuring metric - at least in the practical real world where most people are left to make their decisions - that it's tough for you to make some "value" proposition for other people in saying "X isn't worth Y price."
If their criteria and goals align with yours, then there will be some relevance.

Keep in mind I'm talking strictly here of making the value judgement "These sound great" or "These are not worth, or worth, their price."
What people like and what is worth it is going to be subjective.

But that doesn't mean that exchanging subjective reports is meaningless or useless. I have found that the subjective reviews from some other audiophiles and writers have led me to speakers I've really liked. And conversely, I have found that speakers I first heard myself were very well described by other people's subjective reports. So I don't think subjective impressions are useless; I think it's possible to fairly accurately describe the sound character of a sound system. Whether someone else likes it or not is always a personal call.

Um, you don't need to clarify, I told you, you strictly speaking about value judgements for yourself are fine. But the value judgements of billionaires as you might imagine are something of little concern to 99% of the population, thus their judgments are essentially worthless as they function in a world where money is no object. Perhaps once someone gets there, they can relate, otherwise, we'll stick to commonality of scientific discoveries and such to base out first impressions (along with actual listening tests as well).

This is why I wouldn't ridicule folks for their decisions, nor their choice of folks they trust to help them to come to decisions (you may find a review who likes 95% of the things you like, so trusting a review of his future products, there is a higher chance you would enjoy the product). But I also understand with independent tests, those are currently the best metric for EVERYONE exposed with the good and bad range of these metrics (like hearing transparent equipment, and mega distortion ridden equipment). With measurements, there need be no faith-based risks. The worst thing that could happen with measurements, is they miss something, or the devices doing the measurements malfunction or were done under unscientific settings, or unreasonable settings.

Sure that would be great.

But in the real world, almost no one can do that when auditioning speakers.

And that is why alternative methods, easier methods, and more objectively truthfully accurate methods like scientific scrutiny exist. And why they don't require you or I be present. Like there is no person on this planet that can argue one of the lowest measuring amps (with respect to SINAD) can compare with the highest measuring amps. They technically can argue and have their opinions, but they just look ridiculous doing it. But this has occurred in the past, and it occurs today where things like the THX 789 are labeled as "sterile, analytical, devoid of emotion/musicality". This sort of idiocy is comedic relief at best. But thankfully, those sorts of people are becoming a minority more and more every day. Here is something I doubt you can argue as well: Going for subjectivist reviews and turning to places like this - you are far less likely to then go back to lending credence to listening tests solely. Objective and scientific principles is what is used as a bedrock to create all of these devices. So to be someone who knows about the science, and to then turn away and say their sole ears are what is most accurate is pure lunacy and is why you never see many converts away from this sort of thinking, but you do see people who are heavy subjectivists, regularly moving to this side of the fence.

The particularly strong sense of "open, boxless-sounding" spacious, 3 dimensional imaging aren't just down to my personal psychology or set up.
I've heard it in every single demo of the various MBLs and every single review, bar none, remarks on this particular sonic trait, as have a great many audiophiles who have heard the MBL speakers. It's hardly surprising, given they design and how it differs from the average speaker.

And if someone likes that type of sonic presentation....and can afford it...the MBLs make sense as a purchase.

Sorry, I can't parse that section.

If you mean to imply I take the MBL marketing as "gospel" or that anyone else should, that's a complete strawman as nothing I have suggested even HINTS at that.

No, I'm not imply that, but your reasoning is fully in line with accepting listening tests as higher-order for compiling products for a purchase, rather than objective independent reviews/measurements, and seem to downplay my statements against companies like MBL because I made remarks about them not wanting to do what is logically in their best interest (to prove at all sides, their products are top of the line, yet they don't run out and ask for as many places to publish reviews with scientific testing to go with it). Again though (and I haven't mentioned this until now), you're not actually addressing my post in totality with the full scope of what I've been saying, you're picking the lowest hanging fruit and replying with one-liners you think stand as valid replies. You haven't for instance in this portion addressed my retort of when you made the pointless (now not even defended claim) about my "psychoanalysis" of which I still stick to, and of which you then make your biggest blunder in your finishing sentences.

LOL. You can't be serious at this point.

I'm sure that's top of every company's "to do list" and MBL is just being particularly tardy.

They build products that will have to be sold on the merits of what people actually hear when they audition them, and compare them to other possible purchases.

You seem to forget they don't actually seem to be cowering at the idea of their products being measured. They have sent various speakers, amplifiers, CD player/DACs to Stereophile KNOWING they will be measured. Why do you ignore this fact?

First off, yes I am serious. I don't see how I was being funny.

Second, they don't get the luxury of being labeled as "simply tardy". At their caliber, the benefit of the doubt goes out the window. Please don't ask me to elaborate why, you MUST know this without me having to explain it.

Third, no one cares what they build their products to be evaluated as, in the same way I wouldn't test the sweetness of my orange juice by pouring it down my eyes, I also wouldn't accept buying a system of that caliber if it doesn't compete with systems that have scientific measurements to compare with one another and their competition. And since pride of ownership is an aspect of these products, I'd like to be proud their products decimate others in the price range, or all of them at a lower price range for metrics that are important to me. It's like owning a super car. Even if I know I will never drive it to its max speed, I still want to know what the max speed measured is. Why must I explain something this basic, yet have an "LOL" hurled at me prior as if to demean my idea as ridiculous?

Finally, Stereophile is frequented by the largest subjectivist folks in the whole online sphere of audio. Stereophile has a disgusting history and they are the last places that should be counted one by anyone as they've failed their readers with idiocy like audio grade cables and other such stupidness purporting audible sound improvements. It was only under pressure and under demand that they even started measuring things, and that should be commended, but not wholly because they never would have done it, if they could have gotten away with not doing it as an attempt to right the wrongs of their stories past blunders. So I am happy they provide measurements now of course, but I still wouldn't use them as my singular source, though they are a great source now to be fair. And of course I have seen some of the device measurements. What I haven't seen is how you come to the rationalization that anyone aside from folks with 8 figure earnings can rationalize any purchase of one of their systems. AGAIN, I stress, their products don't have to be interpreted as "bad" or anything. What is bad is if a product is approaching the same performance can be had at 100's fold fractions of the price (albeit with a few hundreds or thousands of dollars in less bling), that is what's bad, and the value propositions simply isn't there for anyone that isn't a millionaire or billionaire. Regardless of what is an opinion or not.

 

[MattHooper]

MBL's?
Bose was doing that back in the 70's.
And for a WHOLE lot less money.
Now many are doing the bouncy house thing with Atmos speakers pointed at the ceiling.

Companies were also making TVs back in the 70's too! And for a lot less than all those silly flat-screen HD models they sell now!
Perfect for the person who wishes to ignore advanced performance differences and only talk price! I'm presuming you are using an old CRT TV and computer monitor? They can be found cheap! ;-)

 

[Tks]

Does it, really?

I'm a strong objectivist-leaner, but I don't think the purpose of this website is to invalidate subjective experiences.

That's not really what science or empiricism is about.

It's about gathering data. And part of that data is that cognition is a powerful influence on how we perceive sound. Hence, the need for DBT.

The irony of DBT is that it proves how untrustworthy our senses are when rendered blind, while simultaneously reinforcing the power of visual cues on the listening experience.

The subjectivists aren't wrong when they claim a bazillion dollar cable sounds better if you believe it should; they're wrong in ascribing that to physics instead of pyschoacoustics.

I believe it is, but I also think we got lost in communication. You final sentence is perfectly put, and that is what I mean't about subjectivism. Also there are points you didn't address that actually elaborate on how hazardous having a subjectivist mindset is. I'm not talking about people who say "the most important thing to ME is how the product sounds to MY ears", the problem is when they convince other people that everything requires this personal outside-muting, and only their opinion on the matter matters (so if they claim they have golden ears, theres no one out there that has the right to tell them they don't have golden ears).

Oh and you're right, I now see I could have misworded my idea. Ive said elsewhere in the thread, heck if we can get large sample data sets of hundreds or thousands of people capable of blind testing all gear and coming to the conclusions with 90%+ confidence in the results when that many people claim "this sounds better to me", then I'd be willing to even not consider objective results as much. But because objective measurements don't lie about basic things like distortion and such, there isn't so much a need anymore for these vast data gathering initiatives. They now serve the purpose to dispel voodoo.

That is what I mean't in my commentary about what this place stands for. Not to demean the subjective experience, but to downplay the weight baseless claims that attempt to piggyback off the foundations of science/physics, yet diverge and attempt to supersede them with the "human element" that is "beyond measurement forever" according to those folks..

 

[Tks]

Perfect for the person who wishes to ignore advanced performance differences and only talk price! I'm presuming you are using an old CRT TV and computer monitor? They can be found cheap! ;-)

On a sidenote, I use a CRT for running classic game consoles of my childhood from time to time :] you can't beat the response times of a CRT, that's for sure.

EDIT: Sony BVM studio reference display for those interested in such things. You've not seen what a real CRT is, till you seen the beauty these things are capable of :]

 

[MattHooper]

Can we please not converse like infantiles? Obviously that is my opinion. The thing you need to understand is, if the opinion is valid for more folks than another and is follow up with evidence(or the absence of evidence from those making claims to the counter), the point isn't to make it a fact, the point is to demonstrate the reasonable statement holds more credence, especially when applied to the general public. And safe to say, I don't know of a single person who I call as a friend, willing to pay the cost of speakers that transcend the six figure bracket. So yes, it's an opinion, but not all opinions are equal, to the contrary of what you might hear in elementary school "every persons opinion is equally as valid".

So...you get to just opine, and some mysterious friends agree, and that constitutes "a more valid opinion" than another? This is evidence-based argument???

Come back to me when you can reproduce this "holographic" effect in all scenarios and settings, or better yet, put it on paper with other people in a 90%+ confidence rating also making the same claim when doing comparative testing to multiple other systems. Otherwise, as Ive said prior, your thoughts on "holographic feels" are perfectly fine for you, and you enjoy it. But just like other ideas, please don't try to explain to me how people ought to treat something intangible if you can't at least quantify it in some way. You leave the door for people to simply bias themselves this way.

First, please stop moving the goal posts. You first tried to tell me my impressions of the character of the MBLs was "unique" and no reason to think otherwise. I have pointed out they are far from unique, that there is essentially total consilience from listener reports on the qualities I described, the evidence of which can be found in every MBL reveiw you can find, and in a great many user and listener reports. So, please, stop trying to insinuate I'm pulling stuff out of my own butt as if it has no contact with the way other people percieve those speakers.

Second, are you seriously doubting that an omni speaker is NOT capable of casting a more spacious-than-average presentation in many rooms? What exactly do you think would be happening to the sound radiated omni-directionally in a room? If you don't know this is well known...I'm not the one who needs to do any studying. Even Floyd Toole has talked about this pleasing effect when he had Mirage omnis at his home.

This is why I wouldn't ridicule folks for their decisions, nor their choice of folks they trust to help them to come to decisions (you may find a review who likes 95% of the things you like, so trusting a review of his future products, there is a higher chance you would enjoy the product). But I also understand with independent tests, those are currently the best metric for EVERYONE exposed with the good and bad range of these metrics (like hearing transparent equipment, and mega distortion ridden equipment). With measurements, there need be no faith-based risks. The worst thing that could happen with measurements, is they miss something, or the devices doing the measurements malfunction or were done under unscientific settings, or unreasonable settings.

Agreed. Measurements are good. Wish we had great measurements for every speaker out there anyone might want to buy.

When you refer to the value of the scientific method, I agree. Nothing I've written suggests otherwise. I've been referencing the practical issues most people face when choosing speakers.

No, I'm not imply that, but your reasoning is fully in line with accepting listening tests as higher-order for compiling products for a purchase, rather than objective independent reviews/measurements, and seem to downplay my statements against companies like MBL because I made remarks about them not wanting to do what is logically in their best interest (to prove at all sides, their products are top of the line, yet they don't run out and ask for as many places to publish reviews with scientific testing to go with it). Again though (and I haven't mentioned this until now), you're not actually addressing my post in totality with the full scope of what I've been saying, you're picking the lowest hanging fruit and replying with one-liners you think stand as valid replies. You haven't for instance in this portion addressed my retort of when you made the pointless (now not even defended claim) about my "psychoanalysis" of which I still stick to, and of which you then make your biggest blunder in your finishing sentences.

Why do you keep ignoring that MBL has sent their speakers to third parties for measurements that will be presented to the public?

Third, no one cares what they build their products to be evaluated as, in the same way I wouldn't test the sweetness of my orange juice by pouring it down my eyes, I also wouldn't accept buying a system of that caliber if it doesn't compete with systems that have scientific measurements to compare with one another and their competition.

Ok, good for you. Not everyone is like you and wants to buy based on measurements. And....?

Personally, I have not found that measurements tell me which exact speaker I'm going to like over another. I've seen speakers that have been castigated by Right-Thinking engineers or lay-DIYers for being all "wrong, wrong, wrong" but which I absolutely loved. I don't have the luxury of having a double-blind speaker testing facitlity. What to do? Well, I just have to go with getting the best audition scenario I can and making my own call. I can look to science done by Harman Kardon that tells me "X percentage of people will prefer Y speaker design in double bliind tests."
That's great. Now I can just go and buy Revel speakers because they always beat everything else in those tests.

Except...when I finally hear the Revel speakers, they don't really grab me. Whereas a number of other speakers do. What should I do? Just buy the Revel speakers over the ones I actually preferred just "because Harman's tests say I'd like them better in blind tests?" Sorry, I'm going to buy the ones I actually liked while listening in the way I'm going to listen (sighted). None of which is a claim that Harman's research isn't valid.
(And it's different from, say, the snake oil of AC cables - speakers DO sound different, so matters of taste validly arise). Maybe I could say "well, maybe the HK studies predict long term satisfaction, so I should just rely on that and buy the Revel speakers presuming I will grow to like them."
Except, the HK studies aren't set up to determine long term satisfaction. And in my personal experience I have never, ever grown to like a speaker that I did not like when I first heard it.

So, while you may base your own decisions only on speaker measurements, I have my own reasons why I don't do the same. I still want to hear a speaker before I buy when I can.

And since pride of ownership is an aspect of these products, I'd like to be proud their products decimate others in the price range, or all of them at a lower price range for metrics that are important to me. It's like owning a super car. Even if I know I will never drive it to its max speed, I still want to know what the max speed measured is. Why must I explain something this basic, yet have an "LOL" hurled at me prior as if to demean my idea as ridiculous?

Because the idea that high end companies like MBL should be lining up to send their stuff to Amir IS ridiculous.

Who is buying more with "pride of ownership" in mind? The audiophile who listens to various speakers and decides he likes one the best, irrespective of measurements? Or the one who wants the product he buys to measure "The Best" so he can point to numbers showing "I Bought The Best!" ?

My point is, that it's been suggested that, GIVEN the extravagant pricing in the high end the only motivation can be "pride of ownership," where, as I say, that is generally not the main motivating factor for why most audiophiles buy their gear. Most are audiophiles, rich or not rich, because they have the audio bug, are nuts about this stuff, and really are searching for the best performing gear they can get.

And...again...your argument continually implies that MBL doesn't care to have their products measured where, as I've pointed out, they DO send their products to be measured along with a review. I don't know why you keep ignoring this point in your replies.

 

[Sal1950]

Companies were also making TVs back in the 70's too! And for a lot less than all those silly flat-screen HD models they sell now!
Perfect for the person who wishes to ignore advanced performance differences and only talk price! I'm presuming you are using an old CRT TV and computer monitor? They can be found cheap! ;-)

Actually, adjusted for inflation, TV's are way cheaper now than they've ever been. A bargin basement 1958 Madman Muntz 24" TV sold for $140, in 2019 dollars thats $1200+. You can get a 55" flat screen at Wally World for under $400
Omni's, (like di/bipoles) will always have a very distinsictive sound much more room dependant than the usual direct radiatior, if they're your cup of tea, great.

 

[Tks]

First, please stop moving the goal posts. You first tried to tell me my impressions of the character of the MBLs was "unique" and no reason to think otherwise.

You said it, not me. Your memory is failing you. Go read back what you wrote, you literally said unique:

They produce some sonic characteristics that are almost unique from what I've heard in other types of speakers.

Next...

Second, are you seriously doubting that an omni speaker is NOT capable of casting a more spacious-than-average presentation in many rooms? What exactly do you think would be happening to the sound radiated omni-directionally in a room?

I'm not, but nor was this the topic of contention. Stick to the points made about specifically what you're saying, and stop trying to divine what my direct replies are attempting to imply. I'm not using terminology like "holographic" and such other, so don't waste my time asking questions before answering or addressing my statements. Simply improper from etiquette.

Agreed. Measurements are good. Wish we had great measurements for every speaker out there anyone might want to buy.

When you refer to the value of the scientific method, I agree. Nothing I've written suggests otherwise. I've been referencing the practical issues most people face when choosing speakers.

Don't disagree here at all. Though just stop only talking about speakers, I'm talking about their whole system, with emphasis on things that are relatively easier to test for like their transports/amps etc..

Why do you keep ignoring that MBL has sent their speakers to third parties for measurements that will be presented to the public?

This should have been done before they were offered for sale if we're being realistic with respect to how reviews are handled in ever other industry. Also since you want to address my statements by constantly asking questions.. Why do you keep asking questions and see that as valid attempt at addressing the topic of contention or the posts portions you're quoting? Can you please stop that and be direct?

Ok, good for you. Not everyone is like you and wants to buy based on measurements. And....?

Not going to repeat myself addressing this pointless one-liner again.

Personally, I have not found that measurements tell me which exact speaker I'm going to like over another. I've seen speakers that have been castigated by Right-Thinking engineers or lay-DIYers for being all "wrong, wrong, wrong" but which I absolutely loved. I don't have the luxury of having a double-blind speaker testing facitlity. What to do? Well, I just have to go with getting the best audition scenario I can and making my own call. I can look to science done by Harman Kardon that tells me "X percentage of people will prefer Y speaker design in double bliind tests."
That's great. Now I can just go and buy Revel speakers because they always beat everything else in those tests.

So your logic: Forget about measurements, and since you don't have places to test speakers, just go and randomly pick one out even though you will never be able to properly compare each of them in totality, or even in portions. Sorry but this is dumb. Again, also, this isn't only about speakers. But this is easiest for you to argue since testing them is such an arduous process, you may as well default to the easiest thing (that being trying it out and making a purchase decisions based on how your senses are functioning and how elated you feel that day). This would make for more sense if they allowed you to demo products in your own home, and gave you a like a 60 day test run for you to truly make up your mind. But going in-store and testing something once or twice, and then plopping down hundreds of thousands of dollars seems more reasonable to you.. so be it.

Again, still you're fixated by dictating this discussion with you forced context specifically with speakers. Then you use Harman's testing results (of which are simply listening based, and have nothing to do with other merits people could value like features, or looks, etc.. that I do not at all discredit nor ridicule, but yet you make it seem that is what I'm doing). Your disingenuous method of rebuttal is growing tiresome for me to be perfectly honest. Goal post moving is what you accuse me.. Field-moving is what now I accuse you of.

Except...when I finally hear the Revel speakers, they don't really grab me. Whereas a number of other speakers do. What should I do? Just buy the Revel speakers over the ones I actually preferred just "because Harman's tests say I'd like them better in blind tests?" Sorry, I'm going to buy the ones I actually liked while listening in the way I'm going to listen (sighted). None of which is a claim that Harman's research isn't valid.
(And it's different from, say, the snake oil of AC cables - speakers DO sound different, so matters of taste validly arise). Maybe I could say "well, maybe the HK studies predict long term satisfaction, so I should just rely on that and buy the Revel speakers presuming I will grow to like them."
Except, the HK studies aren't set up to determine long term satisfaction. And in my personal experience I have never, ever grown to like a speaker that I did not like when I first heard it.

So, while you may base your own decisions only on speaker measurements, I have my own reasons why I don't do the same. I still want to hear a speaker before I buy when I can.

Okay, multiple things to address here

1) Then you have to let go of your confidence and be willing to admit there is something flawed with your ears as a possibility.

2) It's fine if you have a different preference, but if it wasn't blind tested, then you can't compare yourself to what Harman test group preferred, AT ALL.

3) Speakers do sound different, no need to restate this basic fact, but the way they're sold is the same because the same people selling these speakers, are most of the time selling cables in the same fashion with those speakers, so an instant bias against them from folks here arrises (I won't explain to you why this is a logical deduction, if indeed you don't see it by now). Again, I don't understand how many times I have to say it. No one is concerned that you bought a speaker you like. Just stop trying to compare yourself with metrics that had the pre-conditions you yourself haven't been put through.

4) The whole spiel about "I have never grown to like a speaker that I did not like when I first heard it". Ive never met someone that can say this about EVERY single speaker they have heard. Also, your claim is ambiguous. For all I know "ever grown to like" could be a week, or could be a year. So while I can side with you if your definition of "growing to like" was conducted in the span of a few days.. I find it hard to believe for things you've had months or years. Second, again... your parameters about liking something can be influenced every time you look at it with disdain (due to aesthetic qualities perhaps or something outside of sonic quality). So this whole portion doesn't mean much of anything anyway even if I didn't address it as I just did.

Because the idea that high end companies like MBL should be lining up to send their stuff to Amir IS ridiculous.

Of course, absolutely ridiculous sending it to one of the most rigorous impartial testing locations. /s

Nonsensical declaratory statement yet again. They should be dying to send their stuff anywhere willing to test with precision testing equipment. Not just Stereophile where they will test their stuff -6dbFS conveniently for them.

Who is buying more with "pride of ownership" in mind? The audiophile who listens to various speakers and decides he likes one the best, irrespective of measurements? Or the one who wants the product he buys to measure "The Best" so he can point to numbers showing "I Bought The Best!" ?

The actual rational people that will see the value of owning something that is scientifically proven to be state of the art, and also aesthetically wonderful, as well as from a brand with serious provenance and pedigree for such. This is where you flawed logic fails you miserably. You demean people with these lunacy-ridden machinations. To say anyone driven by scientific and sound testing methodology is devoid of emotions and ability to feel an emotional connection with their possessions.. What a condescending and disgustingly mentally gated view that is..

My point is, that it's been suggested that, GIVEN the extravagant pricing in the high end the only motivation can be "pride of ownership," where, as I say, that is generally not the main motivating factor for why most audiophiles buy their gear. Most are audiophiles, rich or not rich, because they have the audio bug, are nuts about this stuff, and really are searching for the best performing gear they can get.

Apologist nonsense, and a backtrack attempt somewhat. Also you start using the word audiophile which means different things in different contexts of different people employing the word. The price points of the top echelon priced gear is mostly a pride of ownership AND exclusivity ordeal. This is business 101 of luxury products since the age of kings. To say it's not mostly a emotion driven purchase decision is preposterous, simply because these (like the companies they buy from) are people that don't blink twice to think for a moment buying 10's of thousands of dollars on interconnects. Don't sit here and tell me these people are "audiophile bug bitten folks, it doesn't matter if they're rich". Anyone buying lifters for their platinum cables doesn't get the benefit of a doubt of being "people seeking the best performance products". A few might be, but many don't because they don't seek out objective measurements that literally exist to prove something like performance metrics. And especially not those spending thousands of dollars on cables, that I'd make an educated guess on that I think many would agree with.

What nonsense..

And...again...your argument continually implies that MBL doesn't care to have their products measured where, as I've pointed out, they DO send their products to be measured along with a review. I don't know why you keep ignoring this point in your replies.

You're having issues with reading. Re-read my whole post, I already addressed this. TL;DR: sure they send to Stereophile (nice -6dbFS tests btw..not) and perhaps others. The point is, this stuff should be here and they can settle scores instantly with any skeptics. But then, this actually doesn't even matter with the major points of contention (that being these ridiculous prices to begin with, of which you have no actual protest for in argument, but you will speak out a statement here-or-there against the "death spiral", yet be totally oblivious your sorts of reasoning is what leaves room for acceptance to prices of such absurdity). Then finally not even the price, but the marketing spiel and attempts at justification for these prices. Again I will repeat for the final time. I don't care about prices, I don't care about acceptance for them, I do care about idiotic claims about one metal wire sounding better than another, or one capacitor chemistry sounding different than the other. Likewise if they want to prove themselves, any sane person in the company would be rushing for their gear to be put to the most rigorous tests, and observations. The fact they don't rush to do so is sad (because they potentially could have the best gear period as they may blindly claim, but could actually have verified proof of the claim so it never need be made blindly).

I cannot reason with you any further why it's just simply stupid to attempt to justify not wanting to send out gear of this cost in order to prove your claims of superiority. But again, the lead architect of the omni-speakers has voodoo beliefs, so it's no surprise to us. But it is deemed as normal for you for them not to care to put their products to the test.

 

[Juhazi]

^I find 8 sexier than O, but well this is just me...

And there are some nice modestly priced speakers to be heard in München too! But where is the audience?

 

[RayDunzl]

And there are some nice modestly priced speakers to be heard in Mûnchen too! But where is the audience?

Sitting at home listening to the nice modestly priced speakers they already have?

 

[Thomas savage]

I like to look through the various designs , no interest in going to the high end show though. Super expensive stuff in super crap little rooms and a bunch of worshipers to navigate.

Last time I was in Munich I kept getting sausage shoved in my face, I went with it but it all got too much in the end.

I was drunk quite a lot so fortunately iv forgotten the wurst of it.

 

[watchnerd]

Nonsensical declaratory statement yet again. They should be dying to send their stuff anywhere willing to test with precision testing equipment. Not just Stereophile where they will test their stuff -6dbFS conveniently for them.

If a cottage-size manufacturer can make sales and grow his business without submitting units for testing, what's the incentive for them to take the risk of getting bad test results?

 

[Frank Dernie]

High end audio seems to suffer from a conflict between appearance vs performance that doesn't afflict luxury cars.

Super cars have to both look amazing *and* perform amazingly.

But audio seems to have this strange inversion where one can get great performance from cheap gear and a lot of the good looking gear is nothing special from a performance POV.

Even with supercars there is a tendency to only concentrate on acceleration or top speed, maybe simply horsepower delivery. A surprisingly large , and increasing, proportion are overweight despite low weight being one of the first order requirements of a performance car.
My friend Gordon Murray put a huge amount of effort into making sure the McLaren F1 weighed less than a ton, and was very, very disappointed it was a few kilos more. Cars by people with racing heritage tend to still be good, though Porsches are getting bigger and heavier, sadly, but cars like the much vaunted recent Bugattis weigh well over 2 tons and I consider them poor sports cars - a sort of 2 seat dragster with high top speed. In fact all the VW group "sports cars" have the very, very heavy modular engines I despise

 

[Frank Dernie]

The configuration, app, on the other hand, needs help.

The SD card was something which made sense when it was conceived/designed 10 years ago. The original didn't have internet connectivity, in fact I remember the configurator coming on line and being pleased I could configure my amp myself. Personally I am happy for it to be independent of an internet connection, I don't change configuration often and the one thing it is fun to change, the phono settings, can easily be adjusted on the remote.
I do love the performance and styling though and it was a major factor in buying one - my existing amp was fine apart from the space and electricity it wasted.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Comfort might be subjective, but acceleration, skidpad g-forces, interior noise, and lap times are all highly quantifiable.

Interior noise is the only one which is "highly quantifiable".
Acceleration depends on the driver and tyres at least as much as the car. Ditto skidpad. Lap times even more so.

 

[watchnerd]

Interior noise is the only one which is "highly quantifiable".
Acceleration depends on the driver and tyres at least as much as the car. Ditto skidpad. Lap times even more so.

Well, I was thinking relative to audio....at least they're testable / measurable, even if flawed.

I have no idea how one measures imaging, "deeper black backgrounds", PRAT, or many of the other poetic terms audio writers use.

 

[Frank Dernie]

The particularly strong sense of "open, boxless-sounding" spacious, 3 dimensional imaging aren't just down to my personal psychology or set up.
I've heard it in every single demo of the various MBLs and every single review, bar none, remarks on this particular sonic trait, as have a great many audiophiles who have heard the MBL speakers. It's hardly surprising, given they design and how it differs from the average speaker.

Omni speakers were all the rage here in the UK for a short time 20 or 30 years ago. I thought the open spacious imaging was impressive but when I tried one of my own recordings where the acoustics of the space I recorded it in were no longer as readily apparent, perhaps because the acoustics of the listening room were so strongly brought into play by the speakers. I felt a bit the same with the Apogee Divas I had, I loved them but the imaging was impressive rather than accurate. I would never have known this if I hadn't made any recordings, of course.
I had been considering B&O Beolab 90s for their ability to swap between omni and directional but decided I am too old to buy something like that and then have to sell everything else...

 

[Sal1950]

Acceleration depends on the driver and tyres at least as much as the car. Ditto skidpad. Lap times even more so.

That a highly exaggerated statement Frank.
Yes the the numbers can be highly dependent on the driver, but the best drivers are going to reveal the car's capabilities.
A small field of pro testers combined results will reveal the performance numbers and ranking order very quickly.
There just isn't that large a field of cars to compare in the categories being looked at.

 

[Frank Dernie]

That a highly exaggerated statement Frank.
Yes the the numbers can be highly dependent on the driver, but the best drivers are going to reveal the car's capabilities.
A small field of pro testers combined results will reveal the performance numbers and ranking order very quickly.
There just isn't that large a field of cars to compare in the categories being looked at.

Not my experience.
In CHAMP cars there was frequently 4 secs a lap difference between quickest and slowest the Lola drivers. That is night and day in racing. Part of that was poor race engineers, but there is a marked difference in driver ability even at the top of the game IME.

 

[Tks]

If a cottage-size manufacturer can make sales and grow his business without submitting units for testing, what's the incentive for them to take the risk of getting bad test results?

I can’t constsntly keep repeating myself..

It doesn’t matter the size. Look at March Audio, and ask him what his incentive was to send his gear to Amir, he’s not even “cottage size” I would imagine, yet he still found it worth his effort to send it off.

The incentive is (as I’ve said before) bragging rights, impartial independent testing to prove claims of quality/performance, and yet another boost to a marketing checklist if indeed your device is truly as good as you claim it to be.

Why do I need to explain this? This is elementary logical deduction. The opposing maiden to this, if you’re not willing to have your products tested independently and scientifically, you are potentially making hallow claims, you look bad when someone presses you for it and you start revealing your faith-based voodoo magical reasoning as to why you’re special and don’t need to prove it, and you simply don’t believe in your product essentially.

The worst accusation can also then levels against you, that being: you’re potentially selling snake oil.

All of these things can be avoided instantly by taking a scientific, and/or independent approach to testing.

This is why many luxury companies don’t actually like having their products put through their paces, and why they focus more on bling than bang. And then price their products where people with more money than sense can be their customers.

If you take a look around the reviews of expensive gear Amir has reviewed, you’ll see lots of users saying things like “well there goes another nonsense product at ridiculous prices”. The expectations for high caliber companies of yesteryear to be failures are now conditioned into our minds because hey have been failures when they can’t match performance of $100 products.

So when you ask what incentive they have, technically speaking, for thbfolks they appea to, actually none it seems, because they don’t care how their products measure, since many of the spearheads of companies believe in Magic, and then you believe in that, anything is justification for whatever you do.

EDIT: Mobile typos corrected

 

[watchnerd]

I can’t constsntly keep repeating myself..

It doesn’t matter the size. Look at March Audio, and ask him what his incentive was to send his gear to Amir, he’s not even “cottage size” I would imagine, yet he still found it worth his effort to send it off.

The incentive is (as I’ve said before) bragging rights, impartial independent testing to prove claims of quality/performance, and yet another boost to a marketing checklist if indeed your device is truly as good as you claim it to be.

Because if you're marketing to subjectivists, those testing results have more downside than upside.

By your own admission, there is a segment of the market that doesn't care about measurements, or is actively skeptical/hostile towards them.

If that is one's target market, you cater to their tastes.

The cable makers have proven this game works just fine.