Why Some Audiophiles Fear Measurements

[microstrip]

(...) For amps and electronics .. I need flat response, low distortion and impeccable behavior: stability, low impedance output for preamps and lot of power for amps under all loads, extended bandwidth.. that much is clear for me For speakers the jury is still out on what set of measurements is needed to accurately predict the sound of a speaker. It is clear to me however that smooth frequency response is important in speakers ... and this off ais as well

Frantz,

Could you make clear (may be I am misinterpretating it) if we can assume from your quoted posting that you consider that For electronics the jury is already in on what set of measurements is needed to accurately predict the sound of electronics equipment ?

 

[MarinJim]

My speakers sell for about $400/pair at Audiogon (retail for 3 times that).

To my ears they are smooth; on and off axis.

Are they the best? No.

Do I know their measurements? In part yes. Do I like those measurements? Not particularly, but that's ok.

Do I prefer live music? It depends ... If it's a great concert at a great venue, and sitting at a great spot; yes.

Do I measure what a great live concert sounds like? No; I listen to it.
Same with music at home from my speakers. :b

Exactly. Measurements? Measurements? We don't need no stinking measurements!

 

[Wasatch]

I'm not a fan of measurements also. Charateristics/musicality cannot be measured.

 

[Jeff Fritz]

It depends on how deeply you want to learn about your hobby and why things sound as they do. I just re-read my article linked on Page 1 and it all still applies. You either want the full picture or you don't care.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Can't say I even understand the concept of not being a fan of, or approving of, or caring about measurements. A system can't be developed, can't exist, without measurements. Not needing them, caring about them, approving of them is like saying I love the meds my doctor prescribes, but I don't like chemistry.

OK? Was there a point?

It's nonsensical. It disconnects the design from the experience. Which is how one can tell that "I don't care about measurements" really means "these measurements don't verify what I hear." There's really nothing to disapprove of...you disagree with the measurements? That probably just means that you've got weak/bad measurements or that your subjective preferences are not in agreement with the objective analysis. Another big "what's the point?" We like what we like. And all of us, even those of us who "believe in" measurements, listen with our ears. There are no exceptions.

Tim

 

[Syntax]

You either want the full picture ....

Only that counts.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Measurements can help to develop more enjoyable audio products .
I dare any " golden ear" audiofile to detect a 3 dB dip in a 200 hz - 10 khz frequency range within a 100 hz correct position
I bet a dutch windmill on it that nobody can .
Only a lucky guess maybe but certainly not 3 times in correct succesive order .
A good spl measurement/analyzer /tool can do it easily within 0,2 dB accuracy.

 

[NorthStar]

It depends on how deeply you want to learn about your hobby and why things sound as they do. I just re-read my article linked on Page 1 and it all still applies. You either want the full picture or you don't care.

Measurements are fine if you know the measurer (the guy who did those measurements) and its measuring room and tools.

They are part of the curiosity at understanding humans and measuring machines they use.
And of course of that knowledge processing of our brains. That is if I can interpret them correctly and in the proper context with total accuracy ... Good luck to me!

I have many graphs about my speakers and also some of my electronics.
They are fun to look at, and interesting to know how they were done and by who.
I figure they represent about 1% of my total enjoyment; which is huge in my book.

I don't stay away from them measurements done by others or myself, but I cannot rely in my own technics and tools; I just ain't that advanced in life ... And I read very carefully other's measurements in trying to relate with my own understandings.

Some measurements are right on; that no problemo. Others relate too much on tools (microphones) that are different 'perceptioneur' (interpreter) than the human ears attached to a human head with human emotions and brains. Mics don't have brains, or anything remotely related to humans.

But measurements are more fun; and music listening is more serious. :b

 

[NorthStar]

Jeff

Here is my question. Why have I heard speaker systems in great rooms which measure terrific but does nothing for my ears? Also I have heard systems that measure just OK but sound terrific. I have also heard several systems in the the same day all of which measure terrific but only one sounded good to me

My question. No one hears the same. We all hear different. Is there reason to think that there are speakers that sound best to certain ears which but not others? After all if a speaker measures good and is heard in a good system, why wouldn't I like it

This brings me to my mantra in this hobby....... "remember that it is your ass in the sweetspot so make your decisions based on your ears and your wallet"

Exactly.

It's nonsensical. It disconnects the design from the experience. Which is how one can tell that "I don't care about measurements" really means "these measurements don't verify what I hear." There's really nothing to disapprove of...you disagree with the measurements? That probably just means that you've got weak/bad measurements or that your subjective preferences are not in agreement with the objective analysis. Another big "what's the point?" We like what we like. And all of us, even those of us who "believe in" measurements, listen with our ears. There are no exceptions.

Tim

Yes, and we like what we play.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

This may come as a suprise to many (coming from me), but I do think that measurments are important. My problem with them is that I don't understand the vast majority of them, which in large part is why I am here. I have learned more about measurements in the last year or so, then in 30 years gone by, and that's due entirely to the membership base here. Does that mean I now read all of the technical parts of a review? No, not by a long shot, but I do glance over and read those parts I understand. And if its about a product I am interested in, I'll jump into a discussion and ask a question or two.

At the end of the day however, it's about how something sounds to me. Reviews specs at that point are totally forgotten about, although I will have retained some of the things I read and try to listen for them, if applicable. Knowledge (in general) is a good thing, and I'd like to think I'm more "audio" knowledgeable now.

 

[MarinJim]

After a glass(s) of some nice Cabernet and Leonard Cohn spinning, or Bill Evans, I have never, ever thought "Hmmm, I wonder what my stereo is measuring right now?".

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Here is my question. Why have I heard speaker systems in great rooms which measure terrific but does nothing for my ears? Also I have heard systems that measure just OK but sound terrific. I have also heard several systems in the the same day all of which measure terrific but only one sounded good to me

You've heard speakers you liked the colorations of, and speakers you didn't like the colorations of. Maybe.

My question. No one hears the same. We all hear different. Is there reason to think that there are speakers that sound best to certain ears which but not others?

Absolutely. I think speakers are absolutely the right place to pick your color. If you keep it low noise, low distortion, broad and flat FR throughout the electronics, though, you'll just make the whole process a lot less painful, and in that arena, good measurements can be extremely informative. Speakers? Not so much...

This brings me to my mantra in this hobby....... "remember that it is your ass in the sweetspot so make your decisions based on your ears and your wallet"

Mine would be a bit more complex: "Whatever is in your wallet will take your ears a lot farther if you keep everything neutral in front of the transducers."

Tim

 

[NorthStar]

Measurements are just that; a set of tools, a guide, a set of rules to abide by.

Good to get in the ball park, and measuring room acoustics in concert halls.
They help to get a better sound; no doubt about that.

Without intelligent measurements our sound wouldn't be as good as it is now.

That's where measurements count the most; in our own rooms.
Then they are good for speaker's designers.
And our electronics of course; to measure distortion levels, jitter, rumble (turntables), vibrations (speakers and turntables), and all that other stuff that we are familiar with (Stereophile for one).

I admit it; if it measures good coming from a professional reviewer, with his own measuring tools, and in its own studio or home, I am easily influencable. And that is part of the equation when I bought my pair of loudspeakers 25 years ago. But the final draw was my set of ears at the audio dealer's room. ...And then I kept satisfying myself at home from these two notions: listening sessions, and thinking the measurements did corroborate somehow with my mind's perception...
And other pieces of electronica over the last 40 years or so.
But 40 years ago measurements were quite rudimentary, and very basic.

It's a balance at the end; our own personal balance, our own set of measuring decisions, based on everything that we know so far, plus the progress we made at improving our sound over our own personal audio's journey. Plus the technological advancements over that voyage in time, with the improved measuring tools and techniques.

For me, the biggest advancement is in the Room Correction & EQ systems. The good ones. Definitively, irrevocably! Personal Room Acoustics. And measurements are 99% part of that equation. And I got no fear in saying that. I am an avant-gardiste; I get out of the past to embrace the future...

 

[Randall Smith]

Hey MarinJim, is the earth still flat where you are from?

 

[steve williams]

is the earth still flat where you are from?

To whom is your question addressed Randall

 

[steve williams]

Tim

Given what you have just said about measurements and your preference for a flat response curve are your ears always able to pick out and prefer those such speakers with a flat frequency response curve over those with some coloration. Or do you just look at the measurements only.

 

[Orb]

It depends on how deeply you want to learn about your hobby and why things sound as they do. I just re-read my article linked on Page 1 and it all still applies. You either want the full picture or you don't care.

Totally agree and to add; what some may miss on this forum is that certain measurements work towards specific goals and improving understanding-focus usually in a specific way; in other words those who state measurements tell us all also need to understand the goals and scope of such measurements and that there are limitations to every test.

An interesting example is the Balanced Mode Radiator tweeter design.
Using certain traditional speaker measurements such a concept is a dogs dinner, and yet implemented correctly with measurement-tests structured for this type the performance can match a traditional tweeter and has benefits in some areas such as beaming issues.
Only a few speaker companies are successfully implementing BMR, and earlier concepts such used by NXT (think it was the DML but could be wrong) ended up being a failure.

Not suggesting BMR is a replacement but just briefly highlighting how different technology concepts may not look good using traditional ideas and associated measurements.
Keith Howard did a great article on BMR in this months March Hifi News.

Cheers
Orb

 

[fas42]

Absolutely. I think speakers are absolutely the right place to pick your color. If you keep it low noise, low distortion, broad and flat FR throughout the electronics, though, you'll just make the whole process a lot less painful, and in that arena, good measurements can be extremely informative. Speakers? Not so much...

Once a system is working to a certain level of resolution the critical set of measurements, the ones that actually pinpoint why one system sounds better than the next, from the point of view of the sort of people who inhabit this forum, is the "quality" of the distortion. And the word is quality, meaning the very, very precise makeup of that distortion: a simple one number specification of a total distortion is completely meaningless, useless -- equivalent to saying that a car can reach 100mph as a measure of true worth.

And of course no-one is supplying that information. Because it is too hard, they don't know what and in what way to measure it, people don't talk about it, it's not "sexy". So people will continue to froth at the mouth about FR, room treatments, everything but everything that is around the edges of what truly determines a really good system. They will still ignore the elephant in the room: truly understanding and coming to grips with low level distortion ...

Frank

 

[NorthStar]

Good point Orb; measuring a conventional loudspeaker and an electrostat one requires different methods, and tooling readjustments.

Like you just mentioned regarding that specific tweeter design in your above post.

* Measurements and how we interpret them correctly, is getting better each day that passes by.
More and more they are directly related with real normal rooms; ours.
...In direct relation to their own acoustics.

Our PCs are becoming more and more measuring tools with the help of good quality microphones.
We are way more ahead than just 10 years ago, and that's the way to do it: ourselves in our own rooms. And by using intelligent programs developed by intelligent people.

______________

P.S. Yes Frank, for sure, but low level distortion exists in real life as well; in live concerts, in music halls, in studios, in theaters, in Jazz or Blues clubs, in auditoriums, in our own rooms, etc.

 

[microstrip]

Audiophiles should do not fear measurements - they should however fear poor and excessive interpretation of inadequate or incomplete measurements.