The Fremer lays an ostrich egg thread

[Gregadd]

Yeah , it was like when he tried to convince me I really did not like the Martin Logan Hybrids on the basis of a Harman study. Coincidentally they were driven by the ML 53.

 

[mep]

I’m still trying to figure out why this thread even started and why anyone thought it was a big deal that MF didn’t like the ML-53. Big deal. JA didn’t like it either, but everyone is focused on MF. MF has stuck his neck out and done his fair share of blind testing and smoking the others by picking out the components under test so he has a sharp set of ears. DaveyF started this thread and he said:

IMO, MF didn't need to defend himself as he did, because I feel that he had every right to write what he did....specially since i happen to agree with him 100% as to the abilities of this amp. When I heard the 53's, i thought they were broken...BUT at the time just chalked it up to a different 'taste' than mine.

So why is thread all about pooh-poohing what MF said about the ML-53s? MF is a reviewer and he reviewed them and didn’t like them which is his prerogative. Trying to paint MF as a clown who just wants to entertain people and he doesn’t really mean what he said or you can’t take him seriously strikes me as odd. JA is the editor of SP with years of measuring gear and listening to gear and he didn’t like them either. If the rest of the world loves how the ML-53s sound, it really doesn’t matter what MF and JA think.

 

[Gregadd]

-1

 

[rbbert]

You even met Doug as well right? In my case I focused on talking to the designers, but this is of course out-of-topic.

I don't think it's too far off topic to discuss listening sessions with reviewers to see how their opinions match (or don't) one's own. Yes, Fernando you're right of course, I spent an hour or so with Doug Schroeder on Saturday and again on Sunday, and close to an hour with Fremer earlier on Sunday.

At RAMF 2011 I spent extra time talking with Kevin Voecks and Reinhardt Goersner (sp?), and Nick Doshi both years (he must be one of the easiest manufacturer/designers to talk with).

 

[rbbert]

I forgot about Jeff Joseph as well; it's too bad (for me) that his $30k Pearl 3's are the speakers of his I really like; that's both a lot of money and an extremely competitive price point, but I enjoyed time with him more than the other speaker designers.

 

[rbbert]

I thought the thread started for two reasons, both of them somewhat mirroring the A'gon thread. First that there was a negative subjective review in Stereophile, second that a component which measured well and also has had some good subjective reviews was disliked by MF. Probably reasonable starting points for this type of discussion.

 

[amirm]

Sorry Mike. I saw that that coming and ducked.

Nah. When you create a fight, you don't get to say you saw something coming .

You said that MF provided an "informed opinion." Informed means a level of expertise where the knowledge can be trusted to be far more correct than wrong. Yes? You are a lawyer. You are used to the concept of standard of proof for different type of cases (e.g. civil vs. criminal). What would you say the standard of proof is here?

To crystallize this, let's say there is more at stake here. Let's say that the company that sells such an audio product can actually be shut down if they built an amp that "caused fatigue over time." Would you say the review of MF claiming such is sufficient proof of that? If you owned that company, would you say there is reason enough to close you down?

You mentioned the Harman review of speakers. What is your opinion of your speaker company getting shut down based on that data? Equally good? Bad? One better than the other?

 

[amirm]

Yeah , it was like when he tried to convince me I really did not like the Martin Logan Hybrids on the basis of a Harman study. Coincidentally they were driven by the ML 53.

Would you like to bet that the result would be the same if they used a different amp?

Don't. Because they did:

The amplifier was a Mark Levinson 532H, with adequate power to drive the speakers at the listening volumes used in this test without clipping.

532H is a traditional linear amp:

 

[Gregadd]

Would you like to bet that the result would be the same if they used a different amp?

Don't. Because they did:
:b


532H is a traditional linear amp:

Wagering and betting of any kind are not permitted on WBF. I'm sure.
Not if they let me set up the test.

 

[Soundminded]

Of course.


Well, thanks for the compliment Mike . While listening for flaws is a hobby for you all, it used to be my job. For a decade, I managed the development of audio technologies at Microsoft. I went from not knowing how to listen, to becoming a trained expert listener. We routinely conducted large scale tests at Microsoft, using the resident audiophiles to see what they could hear vs our expertly trained group. In almost no case could audiophiles hold a candle to any of us, myself included. I was no smarter than anyone. I simply had gone through formal training to hear artifacts. Once there, I could hear things that others simply could not -- audiophiles included.

It is a tough pill to swallow but audiophiles as a group, tend to think of their abilities far higher than reality. My own industry data shows that. As does other tests. Here is one done by Harman:

I assume audio reviewers are the pinnacle of where audiophiles think they are. Or we wouldn't be having this discussion. But look at their dismal scores above.

Sean post his "how to listen" software in this forum. Did you run it? I did. It is a simple test of whether you can hear colorations. I did OK. I then sat through two rounds of it in blind testing at Harman. The off-line practice helped me get way ahead of every other dealer in the room. But Sean beat me easily. In the second round, I kept up with him better, up to 70%. But he still beat me. I am confident with practice I could do better. But that is what it takes: methodical practice in controlled settings where we know what observation is right, what is wrong. Randomly listening to music gets us nowhere or else, I would not have needed any training.

Now, over the years, I would run into what rare individual who didn't need practice and was good at hearing artifacts naturally. But there is one person like that for every 1000 audiophiles.

This is all data. You want to run by assumptions not based on one, then go ahead. I don't work that way. As I said, my job and livelihood/career depended on me being right about audio observations. Once you are in that seat, you don't go trusting some reviewer's subjective assessment. Or what post you read from another on a forum.


I was an audiophile for 30 years yet I could not hear 10% of the artifacts that expert listeners could prior to training. Fidelity was always important to me and I always tried to listen as much as the next guy. Maybe you are the exception Mike. Maybe you are the 1%. But please don't tell me the 100% is that way. I know first hand from testing such claims that this is not so.


Effort <> results. If one of your sales people put in 16 hour days but sold no cars you would fire him. You would do that because you have a metric of if you are right: sales. You have none in the context we are talking about here. You do an upgrade and you think yous system is better. But the system may be the same or worse. You don't have that data point. There is no frame of reference. You may be right but are not providing data. I provided data on why my hearing is good above.


Then by all means listen to him. You quote me saying I am wrong about something. Then you turn around and use the rules of your universe to argue with me. That is illogical. If I come to your dealership and say I want a car that is like Ferrari, you can' tell me Honda's are more reliable and I should buy on that basis. It would make no sense. I am not asking you believe me. I am asking you to not tell me what to believe based on folklore. If you have date, put it forward.


I fully understand where he comes from too. So now what? You are smarter than me so you should be right? I have data on my side. I know for a fact he could be reporting the wrong thing due to fallacy of human observation. You have what on your side? A bunch of unverifiable subjective reports by him? What makes you right and me wrong? Oh, I remember. I don't know how to listen and you all do .


If that's the case, then why did you say what you said at the start of this post? You sure painted a picture of me being deaf and stupid. Now you don't know?

It looks like your chances of getting accurate information is about 250% as great with a coin toss as by following the opinions of the magazine golden ears and when you're done getting the advice you still have your coin you can put back in your pocket. However, that doesn't mean the reviewers are useless. Quite the opposite. Based on 20% accuracy, they are a strong negative indicator. That means you have an 80% chance of being right if you read what they say and do exactly the opposite. I'm impressed. If only I could get such excellent negative correlation in advice about what stocks to invest in and short I'd be able to afford not just all equipment I might want ever want but all of the rest on the market too. God, just think of it. Hell is a lifetime of opening shipping boxes and never having the time to plug in and use whatever is inside. I think I'll stick to a coin toss.

 

[andromedaaudio]

My problem with the old ML versus new is this , pictures of the insides of the new 5 versus old 4 series , progress ???
similary priced units , at least overhere

4 series
http://www.stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/505marklev/index.html




5 series , scroll down a little

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mark-levinson-no532h-power-amplifier


The new 52 ref pre is coming in january

http://www.marklevinson.com/Products/Category/17

 

[Soundminded]

I'm really impressed with the 20% correlation for the golden ears. Here's some anecdotal evidence that's consistent with it. Notice that not only did the golden ears not hear the important discepancy between his recording and live sound first himself, he didn't seem to hear it even after the audience pointed it out to him. In fact when they did, he didn't even seem to understand it. Would you take advice from such an individual or those of his ilk? I certainly wouldn't. It starts at about 29 minutes into the interview. I may have posted this link before.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mEsuKqj5wA&feature=relmfu

Do you think he would have gotten better results with an ML53 amp than the tube amp he used instead? BTW if anyone has an ML53 they want to find a new home for and sell at fire sale prices or just give away because they don't like it, I'll be happy to take it off their hands and use in in my main sound system. I'm sure I can live with it. I like the way solid state amplifiers sound.

 

[Gregadd]

Nah. When you create a fight, you don't get to say you saw something coming .

Actually if I picked a fight I would expect a "sucker punch", that you have promptly delivered. I did not pick a fight. You have a chip on your shoulder. That chip is a desire to sale an amp that Fremer criticized. That adverse criticism could affect sales.. Here is my post .
Or it could be that he listened to the Levinson and gave his honest and informed opinion. There is no doubt in my part he will do the same with the Momentum amp. Others have a financial interest also. If I say I like the Momentum and I do, how is that wrong or a "disaster." Just because accommodation pricing is available does not mean he will avail himself of the opportunity. Would that enhance your opinion of his review?
This is picking a fightBTW, I don't think we need to wait for the Momentum review. He is going to say it is the best sound he has heard, the notes held together like long lost friends meeting each other again, and that the amp was so good that even after he powered it off, it kept on playing!
AMIR

You said that MF provided an "informed opinion." Informed means a level of expertise where the knowledge can be trusted to be far more correct than wrong. Yes? You are a lawyer. You are used to the concept of standard of proof for different type of cases (e.g. civil vs. criminal). What would you say the standard of proof is here?

Surely you do not equate "expert opinion with"informed opinion? "" I would suspect being around the industry as long as Fremer has he would have absorbed some technical knowledge if only by osmosis. I know I have.

To crystallize this, let's say there is more at stake here. Let's say that the company that sells such an audio product can actually be shut down if they built an amp that "caused fatigue over time." Would you say the review of MF claiming such is sufficient proof of that? If you owned that company, would you say there is reason enough to close you down?

I am reasonably sure that Harman was aware the potential outcome of a review, If you don't want to play the game then don't submit your product for review. I wonder does it bother you that your response to the negative review is stereotypical?

You mentioned the Harman review of speakers. What is your opinion of your speaker company getting shut down based on that data? Equally good? Bad? One better than the other?

I don't have a company. Let's assume arguendo I did submit some product for review. Hopefully I would chose an unbiased, informed reviewer who would take the effort and time to use it as I intended. In the event of a negative review I would hope the merit of the product would allow me to survive. May products have survived negative reviews and gone on to develop a cult following. Indeed some unwarranted positive reviews have not boosted sales. I take issue with the notion there are no negative reviews. If you pay attention many are damned with faint praise. Endorsement ar often weak and "qualified to death."

Edit:dsit: You might want o know Stereophile panned the Martin Logan CLS. My all time favorite. They even hired Martin Colloms to substantiate their opinion with measurements. I never bothered to write them a letter. I was to buys enjoying the music.

 

[Bill Hart]

Amir: what was being tested in connection with that chart of performance you posted? You mentioned flaws or artifacts.
It strikes me that acuity in detecting some detail (a sonic 'Where's Waldo') is far different than listening to hear whether voicing, tonality, etc of acoustic instruments sound natural. Just as an example, when I compare an original pressing to a remastered reissue of a vinyl record, the latter will often have more detail but sounds more sterile and reproduced. One might conclude that the latter is better or that it is more revealing, but in many instances, it sounds unnatural to me. Of course, this is not science, and is entirely subjective, but I'll admit to that bias.

 

[Soundminded]

Actually if I picked a fight I would expect a "sucker punch", that you have promptly delivered. I did not pick a fight. You have a chip on your shoulder. That chip is a desire to sale an amp that Fremer criticized. That adverse criticism could affect sales.. Here is my post .
Or it could be that he listened to the Levinson and gave his honest and informed opinion. There is no doubt in my part he will do the same with the Momentum amp. Others have a financial interest also. If I say I like the Momentum and I do, how is that wrong or a "disaster." Just because accommodation pricing is available does not mean he will avail himself of the opportunity. Would that enhance your opinion of his review?
This is picking a fightBTW, I don't think we need to wait for the Momentum review. He is going to say it is the best sound he has heard, the notes held together like long lost friends meeting each other again, and that the amp was so good that even after he powered it off, it kept on playing!
AMIR



Surely you do not equate "expert opinion with"informed opinion? "" I would suspect being around the industry as long as Fremer has he would have absorbed some technical knowledge if only by osmosis. I know I have.

I am reasonably sure that Harman was aware the potential outcome of a review, If you don't want to play the game then don't submit your product for review. I wonder does it bother you that your response to the negative review is stereotypical?



I don't have a company. Let's assume arguendo I did submit some product for review. Hopefully I would chose an unbiased, informed reviewer who would take the effort and time to use it as I intended. In the event of a negative review I would hope the merit of the product would allow me to survive. May products have survived negative reviews and gone on to develop a cult following. Indeed some unwarranted positive reviews have not boosted sales. I take issue with the notion there are no negative reviews. If you pay attention many are damned with faint praise. Endorsement ar often weak and "qualified to death."

Edit:dsit: You might want o know Stereophile panned the Martin Logan CLS. My all time favorite. They even hired Martin Colloms to substantiate their opinion with measurements. I never bothered to write them a letter. I was to buys enjoying the music.

"Just because accommodation pricing is available does not mean he will avail himself of the opportunity. Would that enhance your opinion of his review?"

If there were no accomodation pricing. If he got it from the manufacturer on loan for a specified period of time and had to return it. If he had to pay full retail price to buy it for himself like everyone else. If his magazine did not advertise it or any of its competitors, then at least I might accept that his opinion is not biased. This would be even more convincing if he had no way to know in advance who made it or what its retail price is. That doesn't mean I'd trust his judgment, only that it was not colored by conflicts of interest. I probably wouldn't agree with him anyway. Tube amplifiers, vinyl phonograph records, $150,000 turntables, demagnetizing vinyl records, $150,000 speakers. These do not speak well for him in my eyes. IMO he and those of his ilk exist in a LaLa cuckoo land. I'll bet he even puts those rediculous little T supports under his speaker wires.

 

[Gregadd]

And of course he might view your opinion as equally irrelevant. IMO getting a little annoying. I am sure there are others who wait with baited breath for your every post. With each words the heavens have parted and the truth spews forth. I've heard it all before. Aint that right Teresa?

 

[FrantzM]

And of course he might view your opinion as equally irrelevant. IMO getting a little annoying. I am sure there are others who wait with baited breath for your every post. With each words the heavens have parted and the truth spews forth. I've heard it all before. Aint that right Teresa?

Address the post do not attack the poster ...
of course....Not a moderator

 

[steve williams]

I agree. Thanks Frantz

 

[rbbert]

Few buyers currently pay full retail price, though. Most dealers will discount, especially if their services aren't required or likely to be used, and there is always the used marketplace (and by the end of a review, the items under review are "used"). Accomodation pricing is better and certainly more convenient, but maybe not as big an issue as it at first appears.

Almost anything exhibited at the last RAMF (barring some "premiers" like the Wilson Alexia) could have been purchased at ~30% off with free shipping.

 

[Gregadd]

Frantz Femer is a member here Is this an address to an opinion?
IMO he and those of his ilk exist in a LaLa cuckoo land. I'll bet he even puts those rediculous