Schiit speaks

[spartaman64]

Looks like you are just here to antagonize. I have issued you a reply ban. If you want to bring up anything technical, the rest of the forum is available to you.

they joined april 1st so obviously this is an april fools joke Kappa

 

[boselover61]

they joined april 1st so obviously this is an april fools joke Kappa

Its just a prank science isnt real. No doubt this dude will go back to whatever forum hes from and brag about how Amir couldnt debate him so he banned him instead

 

[PeteL]

You mean you are not going to post as you have?


Here you go:

"Or, you can take this TL;DR summary of where we’re coming from:

1. Differences between audio components are much smaller than most audiophiles make them out to be, at least to the majority of listeners.
2. There are, however, differences that aren’t readily explained in terms of one frequency, one measurement, one number, and these differences may matter to some listeners."

He makes the common mistake that opposite of audio subjectivism is measurements. Measurements are but one tool we have to get to the truth in audio. We believe in controlled listening tests, decades of research in audio and psychoacoustics. And proper understanding of audio engineering.

Even on measurements he gets it wrong when he says we use one frequency. Many of my tests use more than one or full sweep.

Notice how there is not one reference to any paper to back his point of view? He is just throwing out wrong cliches to keep the gorilla marketing and folks like you are falling for it.

Those two statements are rigorously true. There is absolutely nothing there that negates what you are doing here and yes, being an electronic designer that conducted and participated in blind testing, and have a huge pool of customers that are a very significant sample size, is more than sufficient to state these hard facts. Even without referencing to external litterature. The fact that most people exagerate differences that are much less audible than their perception, he knows that just by reading his email. People that pretend to hear things that don't exist. He knows because he measured his products. For the second sets, he's absolutely right, one measurment at one frequency don't tell the whole story, You know that yourself, If not you would not do the other ones. And if it was the case you wouldn't do listening test. You've agreed on this, why the extrapolation on his words on stuff that is pretty basic common knowledge in the audio science community?

 

[WickedInsignia]

I suggest you be more trigger happy next time. This guy came here to argue and piss people off rather than trying to learn. Instead of entertaining these kind of people rather just ban them straight out

I agree fully with this assessment.
@amirm If you'll excuse some criticism (and I know you invite it openly, bless you!), it took moderators and by extension yourself a little too long to recognize Skeptic wasn't here to be productive.
All of his postings since joining (barre one) have been inflammatory, and he joined yesterday (presumably to respond to this very topic).

I can understand the requirement to let someone "throw enough rocks" before cutting them off, but in this case he managed to kick up quite the discourse. Time that was spent responding to someone who was obviously never going to be reasonable could have been spent helping others.

 

[sal]

I feel like we should delete this thread. For posterity

 

[LeRoy]

Amir's measurements are just that. Raw data. Compare it as such, but most of all trust your ears. There are tons of other variables that make one like or dislike a piece of equipment.

My ears always tell me how the audio is and it sounds better when I look at the graphs. My ears do not agree with you.

 

[Tks]

Your position then is, that if the measurements Amir does are better for one headphone amplifier than another, that means the one with lower distortin and wider dynamic range at the point measured is automatically a better amplifier if the power and price are the same?

Better performing, yes. That isnt simply because I say it is, its simply true by defintion. Its like asking the same question but instead of the two measurements you mentioned we simply ask "measures higher output power when all else held equal". If you're ready to say higher power AMPs cant be defined as better performing if all other metrics hold, then you either use a propriety definition of performance, or you're asking about "better in some vague sense" (like asking if it sounds better, which is subjective).

 

[Zensō]

I suggest you be more trigger happy next time. This guy came here to argue and piss people off rather than trying to learn. Instead of entertaining these kind of people rather just ban them straight out

I agree. That said, some other audio forums have been heavily criticized for being quick to ban outliers, so I suspect the moderators here are trying to avoid that stigma. It’s a tough balance to maintain.

 

[muslhead]

I agree. That said, some other audio forums have been heavily criticized for being quick to ban outliers, so I suspect the moderators here are trying to avoid that stigma. It’s a tough balance to maintain.

If people wouldn't respond, he would go away so its this forum's response to his posts that has as much control over the trolls than the admin/overlord. Ignore, don't respond to them and they will eventually go away. While i agree with what you say, if we quit whining to the admin and use the ignore button, we can handle this ourselves.
Dont feed the trolls

 

[DSJR]

Hmm, I aim the below to Skeptic mainly if he reads this. I look back to myself twenty or thirty years ago and see so much 'subjective audiophile' in me from those times. It was only fairly recently after repeated goading from pro colleagues and friends that I tried blind comparisons and opened my mind up a bit more as my eyes were shut out of it...

I took the trouble to read Jason's blog posts some months back and thoroughly enjoyed the tales of the start-up, premises extensions, moving and taking new trusted people on - I've seen some of the trials and tribulations of small audio companies for myself, most notably a sadly deceased loudspeaker firm with some genuine ideas. It ain't easy I can tell you - and this from someone who would have failed himself had I used inheritance money to start something as was proposed twenty odd years back...

I got from Jason that he likes a challenge and he indicated in his writings that a simple 'op-amp solution' was too damned easy for him. This I gathered was why he went out for a discrete circuit output for example and, rather like Quad's original owner (the often revered Peter Walker), his designs were deemed 'good enough for purpose' and indeed they were as I don't think any/many performed seriously below par. (I have tales of the much maligned Quad 33 preamp, which band limits the way it does quite deliberately so it won't stress the partnering poweramp into going ape into their electrostatic '57' speakers)

It would appear that competition from the likes of Topping and reviews done here may well have touched a nerve and it may also have been the case that purchasing the best test gear they could a very few years back, opened many doors for them, or possibly 'cleaned the window' on previous ideas (no idea myself, but I like to think that). Equipment began to be introduced that measured well/properly with absolutely no sonic tradeoff. Jason may well have thought he was selling out by going all 'Me Too' with conventional output circuits, but hopefully they've sold more as a result and made more people sit up and take notice. For those who want a skilfully 'coloured serving plate' (I can't say 'dirty' in this context, but maybe a coloured or patterned plate sets the sonic 'food' on offer better for some), they have well established models that must still sell well enough to remain on the product lists. As repeated in earlier posts, they let the market decide what to make and for a smaller company, I'd suggest that's a good business decision - if the market turned, the alternative designs are always there to swap to - Saga S and Freya S for example over the valved ones - if needs be.

The only thing that I don't think any of us can get past with some subjectivist types is the total reliance on their hearing and the oft repeated statement that we hear things we can't measure - assuming what they feel they hear is absolute and nothing to do with sighted multi-sensory comparisons aiding the mental process. The fact that these perceived differences disappear when the blindfolds go on probably causes total confusion, hence the stress-excuse referred to in earlier posts. Various audible? intermodulation distortion aspects in amps (severe enough in the 60's and 70's models by and large) were readily measured then but totally ignored in favour of THD at one frequency I recall, th eless benign aspects totally ignored or at least heavily played down...

 

[ta240]

I don't see any evidence that ASR, as a forum, singles anyone out, including Schiit. But you'll quickly see a pattern of certain members acting on their own, in every Schiit thread.

The forum is represented by its members and what they post. Aside from Amir, there is no single representation of the forum. If enough members say something and nobody counters it then what they are saying becomes a representation of the forum.

Typically it is just the fringe members that will argue for companies like Schiit; even if their argument is based in facts and measurements. Often it is ones that only joined to argue for them.
If I start a thread where I say "measurements don't matter" or "revel speakers sound terrible" the core members will quickly chime in. If I start a thread where I say "Schiit can't build an amp that measures decently" the core members tend to stay silent or even reinforce the statement. The implication there is that the forum as a group doesn't like the one false thing being said but are okay with the other. After awhile that becomes the personality of the forum as a group. And that eats away at the credibility of a group that holds science up as their most important feature.
It is similar to saying just because people on another forum say that "ASR losers just listen to specifications and not music" and nobody from that forum argues against it, doesn't mean that forum has anything against ASR or their methods.

 

[Rottmannash]

The forum is represented by its members and what they post. Aside from Amir, there is no single representation of the forum. If enough members say something and nobody counters it then what they are saying becomes a representation of the forum.

Typically it is just the fringe members that will argue for companies like Schiit; even if their argument is based in facts and measurements. Often it is ones that only joined to argue for them.
If I start a thread where I say "measurements don't matter" or "revel speakers sound terrible" the core members will quickly chime in. If I start a thread where I say "Schiit can't build an amp that measures decently" the core members tend to stay silent or even reinforce the statement. The implication there is that the forum as a group doesn't like the one false thing being said but are okay with the other. After awhile that becomes the personality of the forum as a group. And that eats away at the credibility of a group that holds science up as their most important feature.
It is similar to saying just because people on another forum say that "ASR losers just listen to specifications and not music" and nobody from that forum argues against it, doesn't mean that forum has anything against ASR or their methods.

There is truth in much of what you say-I've noticed the negative remarks levelled at those who criticize Revel or Topping products as well as the predictable responses when a Schitt defender enters the castle gates. However, we're not all so predictable in our responses-I for one will vigorously defend Schitt's Freya+, only because I own one and listen to it daily. By the same token I will criticize some of their earlier HP amps (I owned one of those and gave it away it was soooo bad). I do agree we should all try to remain objective and not automatically attack anyone who threatens science-science will have no difficulty defending itself.

 

[HiFidFan]

The forum is represented by its members and what they post. Aside from Amir, there is no single representation of the forum. If enough members say something and nobody counters it then what they are saying becomes a representation of the forum.

Typically it is just the fringe members that will argue for companies like Schiit; even if their argument is based in facts and measurements. Often it is ones that only joined to argue for them.
If I start a thread where I say "measurements don't matter" or "revel speakers sound terrible" the core members will quickly chime in. If I start a thread where I say "Schiit can't build an amp that measures decently" the core members tend to stay silent or even reinforce the statement. The implication there is that the forum as a group doesn't like the one false thing being said but are okay with the other. After awhile that becomes the personality of the forum as a group. And that eats away at the credibility of a group that holds science up as their most important feature.
It is similar to saying just because people on another forum say that "ASR losers just listen to specifications and not music" and nobody from that forum argues against it, doesn't mean that forum has anything against ASR or their methods.

You may very well be correct, you've been a member much longer than me. I'm still getting a feel for the place.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

The only thing that I don't think any of us can get past with some subjectivist types is the total reliance on their hearing and the oft repeated statement that we hear things we can't measure - assuming what they feel they hear is absolute and nothing to do with sighted multi-sensory comparisons aiding the mental process. The fact that these perceived differences disappear when the blindfolds go on probably causes total confusion, hence the stress-excuse referred to in earlier posts.

Is it not subjective to pan a reviewed product for having a distortion number higher than most equipment, if the reviewer can't hear the difference?

How is a difference in sound most people couldn't identify, never mind pick out one as 'right' and one as 'wrong' make a piece of gear 'subpar'?

If Amir can't hear the difference, then one dac is just as good as the other for the purpose of the dac, no?

But he won't listen blindly. He just tests and rates on numbers that have no meaning.

 

[Racheski]

Is it not subjective to pan a reviewed product for having a distortion number higher than most equipment, if the reviewer can't hear the difference?

How is a difference in sound most people couldn't identify, never mind pick out one as 'right' and one as 'wrong' make a piece of gear 'subpar'?

If Amir can't hear the difference, then one dac is just as good as the other for the purpose of the dac, no?

But he won't listen blindly. He just tests and rates on numbers that have no meaning.

I suggest you read this thread for an in-depth discussion about the SINAD scores, what they mean in the context of Amir's recommendations, and what the theoretical cut-offs are for audibility. It's a long thread and the discussion starts around page 6, so if you want to save time you can just read responses from @pozz.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ferent-compared-to-other-sources.14435/page-6

 

[DSJR]

Is it not subjective to pan a reviewed product for having a distortion number higher than most equipment, if the reviewer can't hear the difference?

How is a difference in sound most people couldn't identify, never mind pick out one as 'right' and one as 'wrong' make a piece of gear 'subpar'?

Not sure that's correct.

If I understand you correctly - I agree there is a tendency here to chase spec numbers just as it was in the 1970's before subjectivism totally took over BUT, if subjective opinion was all that mattered in terms of dac performance say, we'd all be using units with dongle levels of performance (in my case, a serviceable Chromecast Audio for streaming) and high end would be *all* ladder nos types with horrendous spray of intermodulation distortions and rolled off highs. I think we pretty much all agree (many having done it blind) that a basic Topping or modern Schiit dac isn't going to sound any different to say, an RME or Benchmark dac, but the facilities in say the RME are incredibly useful to many of these able to afford a grand for such a box. Put it in fancy clothes and you're up to three or four grand I reckon...

I think we're all pretty much agreed that dacs are now basically a commodity unless they're some silly high priced confections for audiophiles with high profit margins and very expensive lavish casework. I do feel it's a good thing if designers of cheaper stuff feel emboldened to make top class if simple fare which is close to state of the art, even if we're way over audible levels of dirt and distortion.

What I think happens, is that some designers have shown the way in implementation of chipsets in dacs for example and there's really no excuse to get it so wrong, even if the performance is 'more than adequate.' had one or two bravehearts not tackled it, we'd still have the 'ESS Distortion Hump' which has been shown possible to completely eradicate. My point was that in earlier models and I think by admitance, Jason was doing 'just enough' to do the job competently in sonic terms but no more. I honestly feel the advent of most current Topping products for example, has raised the bar for what's expected from less expensive, let alone more pricey dac boxes and Jason has shown he's well up to doing it as well, but with their little twists on the style and so on, which I actually like very much, although I have nothing of theirs as yet. I have high regard for Jason and fondly remember what I think were his digital designs for Theta in th epast, at very high prices in comparison though. Would be interesting to see how some of these twenty five year old dac designs cope today

 

[amirm]

Is it not subjective to pan a reviewed product for having a distortion number higher than most equipment, if the reviewer can't hear the difference?

Judgements are always subjective. I didn't used to put any judgement score on products when I started. But members repeatedly asked for one since it is such a norm in other reviews. So I started doing that. My judgement score is based on a number of factors including whether a much better engineering/design could be had for the same or lower cost. In other words, whether the poor measurements are a resulting of poor engineering or lack of care (e.g. not measuring the device and finding problems that we find to fix).

Key to my judgements are that I can show evidence to back them. If a DAC produces a SINAD of 70 dB and costs $3000, I can show how that can't possibly be a performant product by showing other DACs with far lower distortion and higher transparency at much lower cost. Such is not the case in some subjectivist review that this and that speaker is great, has fantastic micro-detail, fast bass, etc. They are pure opinion pieces with no evidence as to their reliability. So please don't confuse what I say with another subjectivist says.

 

[amirm]

How is a difference in sound most people couldn't identify, never mind pick out one as 'right' and one as 'wrong' make a piece of gear 'subpar'?

If Amir can't hear the difference, then one dac is just as good as the other for the purpose of the dac, no?

You can assume all these DACs sound the same. In that case, I suggest buying the most transparent one for the same price just in case your assumption is wrong. It is not like you have verified the above yourself in any controlled test.

 

[amirm]

But he won't listen blindly. He just tests and rates on numbers that have no meaning.

I don't listen to DACs. But in many other categories from speakers to headphones and headphone amps, I absolutely listen. The former two have obvious tonality issues which reduce the need for blind tests. The latter I drive to distortion so there is no reason to want to get blind testing. These are ways that I have developed to produce some subjective results without it requiring me spending ton of time on blind tests and defending them. If this is not enough, you are welcome to step up and do blind testing. You don't need the instrumentation that I have.

 

[amirm]

If I start a thread where I say "Schiit can't build an amp that measures decently" the core members tend to stay silent or even reinforce the statement.

You would get me chiming in with disagreement as I already have in this thread. As to other members, they may not know about more recent products. Or having had too much of a bad tasted in the past to come to defense of the company now. I don't see much of that though. Read the review threads of Schiit products that I test and you routinely see members showing new outlook on the company and its products. I hope we all learn to erase past deeds when judging a new product that absolutely delivers.