I've felt for some time that there's a disconnect between quality judged on measurements and quality judged by audibility. Just about any product, including the Amazon Basics amp given a broken panther recently, are likely to be audibly transparent in general use.
So, are measurements pointless? No, not at all, they show whether the design is sound, and especially in the case of high priced product, whether there's any technical justification for the high price in terms of better objective performance. They also show whether the item (and therefore the manufacturer) is honest in its specification and of course whether the item being tested is broken.
However, there are so many things that are nowadays far more important than SINAD, which as I said, just about any product at any price can manage >-70dB, when -60dB (0.1%) was and still is, more than is needed for transparency.
For amplifiers, measurement of peak current capability, stability into adverse, especially reactive, loads, shortcircuit protection, clipping behaviour and I'm sure I'll think of some more are, I suggest, more important these days than SINAD.
Is it therefore right to give a broken panther to a product that meets its specification and is adequate for transparency?
Even if the specification isn't met fully, as long as it's Good Enough, shouldn't that be reflected in the rating? If ASR is the one site that can be relied on for purchasing decisions, free of commercial pressure/sponsorship and audiophile nonsense, then I would expect the relationship between test results and suitability for the job required of the item to be reflected in the rating, and not just SINAD.
S
So, are measurements pointless? No, not at all, they show whether the design is sound, and especially in the case of high priced product, whether there's any technical justification for the high price in terms of better objective performance. They also show whether the item (and therefore the manufacturer) is honest in its specification and of course whether the item being tested is broken.
However, there are so many things that are nowadays far more important than SINAD, which as I said, just about any product at any price can manage >-70dB, when -60dB (0.1%) was and still is, more than is needed for transparency.
For amplifiers, measurement of peak current capability, stability into adverse, especially reactive, loads, shortcircuit protection, clipping behaviour and I'm sure I'll think of some more are, I suggest, more important these days than SINAD.
Is it therefore right to give a broken panther to a product that meets its specification and is adequate for transparency?
Even if the specification isn't met fully, as long as it's Good Enough, shouldn't that be reflected in the rating? If ASR is the one site that can be relied on for purchasing decisions, free of commercial pressure/sponsorship and audiophile nonsense, then I would expect the relationship between test results and suitability for the job required of the item to be reflected in the rating, and not just SINAD.
S