KeithEmo
Member of the Trade: Emotiva
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2014
- Posts
- 1,698
- Likes
- 868
I may do just that.
I am, however, a bit saddened.
I really had thought that this group was about: "Testing audfiophile claims and myths"...
(And, perhaps, about devising new tests to learn new things about new gear and technology....)
But, instead, it's mostly about:
"Deciding not to bother to test audiophile myths and legends because we already know none of them are true".
So far, in several months, I haven't seen ANY discussion about testing ANYTHING new here at all.
(It's all: "Well, someone tested that already... and we trust their answers... no need to bother... move along...."
Any test that shows the opposite of the popular view is "obviously badly flawed" or "a waste of time"...
While tests that support the popular views are "clearly compelling"...
And any flaws we might notice in them are "clearly insignificant"...
If I were to believe the majority fo the posts in the last dozen pages...
All decent audio gear made after 1987 is perfect...
So we might as well all buy a low cost receiver at our favorite big box store or online outlet...
(I still haven't figured out why, if that's the case, we should even keep reading......)
I will add one final thing...
Very few manufacturers of audio equipment have any reason whatsoever to spend money on comparison tests.
In reality, most good products are quite similar in sound quality and performance...
(Note that I did not say "exactly the same".)
However, there is very little justification for spending good money to show your product is "a little bit better".
And the companies who make good low cost products have little incentive to prove their case at all.
Tests cost good money - and most "price sensitive" customers will choose the cheaper one anyway.
Nobody who makes $10 cables is going to sponsor a test to prove that they're as good as $500 cables.
They can't possibly sell enough extra $10 cables to pay for the cost of the test.
(It may cost the audiophile company a $500 sale - but they only make a buck on the $10 cable they sell in its place.)
I will throw one thing out there.
If anyone actually WANTS to compare various products themselves, by whatever methodology they like...
The audio gear we sell where I work - at Emotiva - comes with a 30 day return policy...
Therefore, you can test it, any way you like, and then return it if you don't like the results...
(I'm sure you can find at least a few other manufacturers who offer the same option.)
Sometimes it's fun to learn things without simply taking someone else's word for them.
I am, however, a bit saddened.
I really had thought that this group was about: "Testing audfiophile claims and myths"...
(And, perhaps, about devising new tests to learn new things about new gear and technology....)
But, instead, it's mostly about:
"Deciding not to bother to test audiophile myths and legends because we already know none of them are true".
So far, in several months, I haven't seen ANY discussion about testing ANYTHING new here at all.
(It's all: "Well, someone tested that already... and we trust their answers... no need to bother... move along...."
Any test that shows the opposite of the popular view is "obviously badly flawed" or "a waste of time"...
While tests that support the popular views are "clearly compelling"...
And any flaws we might notice in them are "clearly insignificant"...
If I were to believe the majority fo the posts in the last dozen pages...
All decent audio gear made after 1987 is perfect...
So we might as well all buy a low cost receiver at our favorite big box store or online outlet...
(I still haven't figured out why, if that's the case, we should even keep reading......)
I will add one final thing...
Very few manufacturers of audio equipment have any reason whatsoever to spend money on comparison tests.
In reality, most good products are quite similar in sound quality and performance...
(Note that I did not say "exactly the same".)
However, there is very little justification for spending good money to show your product is "a little bit better".
And the companies who make good low cost products have little incentive to prove their case at all.
Tests cost good money - and most "price sensitive" customers will choose the cheaper one anyway.
Nobody who makes $10 cables is going to sponsor a test to prove that they're as good as $500 cables.
They can't possibly sell enough extra $10 cables to pay for the cost of the test.
(It may cost the audiophile company a $500 sale - but they only make a buck on the $10 cable they sell in its place.)
I will throw one thing out there.
If anyone actually WANTS to compare various products themselves, by whatever methodology they like...
The audio gear we sell where I work - at Emotiva - comes with a 30 day return policy...
Therefore, you can test it, any way you like, and then return it if you don't like the results...
(I'm sure you can find at least a few other manufacturers who offer the same option.)
Sometimes it's fun to learn things without simply taking someone else's word for them.
@analogsurviver and @KeithEmo . . . Why don’t you go over and join the Audio Science Review forum and try your ideas over there. They are not so regimented in separating the objectivist and subjectivist camps because they are not so wedded to commercial interests.https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php
There are some head-fiers who bounce back and forth. My guess is that they would be somewhat more sympathetic to your philosophical bent. For example, they are sympathetic to the idea that amps will sound different when you push them to the edge of their operating limits and will investigate exactly what is going on, and they do test audiophile equipment and enjoy impressive performance beyond audible transparency for its own sake. The general advice for the edge-case amp problems is sometimes just to turn the volume down a little. They have some moderate “believers” and moderate “non-believers” who have common ground in the middle and the forum has a very cordial posting style. They do lots of testing and measuring. Some of them have experience designing and building big-league stuff. Why not try your hand at it?