TLDR; My turn at flogging a head horse.
I don't see any problem with accepting measurements that are unbiased and based on a proven scientific methodology.
I don't like the sound of my EL34/KT88 tube amp. Every now and then I put the tube amp in its box and with the help of my son lift the heavy monster to store it away. It gets replaced by a class D amp, which reproduces the sound much more accurately (IMO) and can be lifted even with my little finger and also doesn't heat up the room. After few months when I get tired of listening to the same amp the tube amp is pulled back for duty for few weeks. For few days I love the tube sound, but it again goes back into storage after few days. I also prefer the sound of my 2010 AVR which is a totaly contrarian view held by most members here in hifivision who say avrs cannot sound better than a dedicated two channel amp the favourite thing being that the power suppy isn't enough, the avr is dong too many things, etc, etc. Though I can easily detect the sound signature of my two stage LME49720NA op-amp based preamp, tube amp, avr, speakers and even interconnect cables, I can find only subtle difference in sound with all of my DACS. The difference are too subtle to fret over which one is better. Though I have never been fully satisfied (human nature), but I'm reasonably happy with my AVR and a allo class D amp. Primary sources are my lossless flac/dsd collection with bitperfect playback using mpd. I just got a graphic equalizer to notch up the high frequencies to a level which I prefer. Using the preamp of that i also find that the performance of my AVR has gone many a notch ahead of my tube amp. Then I found that I can get the same performance by increasing the gain of the LME49720NA op-amps. I also have a cupboard full of LP records and a DD turntable. I love the sound. People say LP doesn't have bass, etc. I don't find anything lacking. But I think I have a psychological bias in favour of the LP record. It sounds good and I don't think LP records can every measure well. Also at this stage I just don't care. The system is too difficult to maintain and I find myself using it lesser and lesser.
I have never bothered to look at measurements or even demo the equipments. Almost all of them have been blind buys after reading specs and opinions on the internet. But I believe in measurements. It's just that I don't have enough knowledge about audio to be convinced that things like SINAD, SNR, jitter etc are the only things required to be measured. But then why would I go for a well measured device? Just like my lack of knowledge about audio, I don't know much about medicine. It is like when I fall ill, i will go only to a registered allopathic doctor who has been measured by a college which practices a medical science recognized all over the world, issues a MBBS degree and teaches medicine that undergo clinical trials with approvals from a competent regulatory non-political body. I would never in my life go to homeopathic, herbal or any traditional practiioner or use medicine which have never seen the light of the day in any clinical trials. Yet people take recourse to alternate medicines based on hearsay, sometimes ancient hearsay and say they are happy, fit and fine. No issue there, but yet I will not venture there. There will be many rotten allopathic doctors, but that doesn't mean I just jump and take recourse to alternate medicine. Something like the ASR is so welcome. Let more sites like ASR come. Having just one ore two sites like this is not good and will hardly make the dent in the snake oil industry fed by unscrupulous manufacturers, the audiophile magazines/media and the rich gullible consumers. More such sites will help people like me, who are not in the audio field to make rational decisions for audio equipments.
I also know that my brain is not perfect. Like everyone else I'm susceptible to subjectivism and hence would rather prefer a device that measures well and rather not make a mistake like I did with my tube amp purchase. The other mistake that I made was to buy the USB Regen. It did nothing and does nothing. You can as well put a usb extender cable and it will work as good as the USB regen.
ASR also says that it does nothing. The tube amp purchase, a pair of electrostats and Polk RtiA9 floor standers were the only device that I purchased after an audition. I loved the tube amp during the demo. Maybe I was psychologically influenced by tons of people talking about the warm tube sound, class A and what not. It has taken me more than 10 years to realize that the ear+brain equipment is a very flawed equipment. If you rely on it, it will bite you later and you will continue to spend money on upgrades. As a rational person thinking why I listen to my AVR in 7.1 mode (not pure direct) playing on polk speakers rather than my 2 channel stereo using the tube amp, the only explanation that comes to my mind is that every person's journey is unique and it doesn't have to match yours. I'm also very happy with my Raspberry PI streamers, which has been a total DIY including the OS. I don't use volumio, dietpi, moode or the picore distributions and have measurably better performance of the parameters like power consumption, load of the RPI, minimal CPU utilization of uneccessary stuff. And it can play anything thrown to it (spotify, airplay, mpd, logitech media server). And playback with Artwork and a desktop.
Some have argued that it is the art that is most important. I have a totally opposite view. Anyone can do art. Art need not be functional and most of the time it isn't. Art is always something that allures to your senses and hence by definition it is deceptive. It can be like a Van Gogh, Picasso totally devoid of realism and yet many people will love it, see something in it and favour it above an accurate and perfect colour reproduction of something real captured by using the science of optics by using a SLR camera. Not everyone can do science, because science requires reproducible results each and every time. Vodoo and art doesn't. If science was an easy thing which every one could do, as of today, each and every country would have sent people to the moon. I'm sure their will be people like me who care more about the functionality and don't care a hoot about the art part unless it enhances the listening experience. And there are people who have the opposite view and there are people who believe in both science and art. And then there are fanboys who believe their brand can do no worng (apple, sony, panasonic, etc). I enjoy music when it has few DIY components. Some people enjoy more when the equipment's cost is high enough or having the McIntosh label on it. That's not to say I don't love art. I love it when it goes hand in hand with science and mathematics. A case is my entire linux desktop is actually an audio visualizer using
glava.
Every speaker driver is different, every amp is different. Even with all the science and technology available, no two manufacturers can reproduce the same sound using their speaker or amp. And the only way to go forward is to measure, measure and measure and do real double blind tests. And yet, equipment which measure well don't sound good to few and vice versa.
It is very much possible that we aren't measuring things correctly or are not measuring few things. As a scientific person one should be open to the thought that we still have milles to go to reproduce sound perfectly. But that doesn't mean
we start favouring ears over something that can be measured. But something is not perfect in this chain of recording sound and playing it back through the speakers/headphones. Sound reproduction is a complex science and it is still evolving and a day will come when it will be possible to mimic the human voice, instruments regardless of your room. We often blame the room, but does a human being speaking in the same room sound artificial? Does playing an actual instrument in your room sound artificial? And yet we spend tons of money in room treatment to make the speakers sound right? My belief is that speakers still have to evolve. Muddyng it with art to hide technological flaws will only make this evolution take longer.
The thing is is there any data on the following?
1) Equipment that measured well sounded awful or bad and how many people were involved in saying it was awful. Was this a valid double blind test or just hearsay by peope angry because their equipment was openly dissed using measurements? Who are these people. Are these from the media paid by the equipment manufacturers? Is there a genuine case of bias in favouring certain manufacturers (see point 5).
2) Equipments that measured bad and sounded so fantastic. How many people were inolved in saying it sounds fantastic. Are these people owners of the equipment. Was this done by neutral testers and was this a double blind test.
3) Equipments that measured good and sound good.
4) Equipments that measure bad and sound back.
5) Who does the measurement? What was the test equipment used and what were the tests. Is the measurement paid by equipment manufacturers that have equipments that measure good. Is the test reproducible by another person using the same test equipment.
All it takes is to take a look at the 5 points above and take one's own decision.
If one is happy with imperfect measuring equipments, so be it. Be happy. That's all that matters. If you are rational and believe in unbiased measurements, that's good as long as you are happy with the results. But if you aren't happy with a well measured equipment it could be either 1) we still cannot measure what is needed to produce sound perfectly or 2) Your brain is playing spoilsport.
The biggest spoiler of imaging of the sound I have are probably my eyes. I have enjoyed songs immensely with this eye mask. It costed me less than 100 bucks.
View attachment 69222
)
