The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio

[Ashley James]

Ash, with the greatest respect you are part of the subjectivist thing as AVI do not publish measurements, only claims. There is a substantial difference between those two things!

Absolute rot Tony!

We have published more information about our products including measurements than any other manufacturer on the planet.

The problem for us was that whatever we published didn't suit the prejudices of the silly subjective drivel merchants. Some discount anything they don't want to believe in the most irrational ways and I can't deal with it.

I think it's the dismissal of silly subjective drivel that has made HDD such a widely read Forum, they already have almost as many uniques as PF. Here the difficulty is that the arguments are between those who believe the nonsense side of audio and others with a reasonable understanding and, as Alan Sircom says, you'll never change them and the two will never agree.

Ash

 

[Joe P]

Ash,

I think more and more are beginning to realise they've been duped and are beginning to reacting against silly subjective drivel now, which is a very good thing, but far to late to save a dying industry

Are you saying that subjectivism killed audio?

Joe

 

[Ashley James]

I think Subjective Drivel played a major part, because ever since I've been in the business, I've talked to customers complaining about retailers and the lack of proper information.

Some comments that still makes me laugh are:

1. Thank you for recommending dealer X, however I don't like attitude because I have more than enough to deal with at home!

2. Any more of this shit and I'm going to Currys.

As Flanders and Swan showed in the fifties, hi fiers were always the but of jokes, but it got much more acrimonious when the subjective stuff took over because it was so obviously cynical commercial and because so many fell for it. Peter Azcel represents exactly the engineering fraternity's attitude at the time and ever since.

However, there are many other reasons as well for it to fail of which TV and the associated technology has played a major part since the VCR appeared and more recently Apple and good headphones.

Ash

 

[darrylfunk]

flanders and swann.

 

[positive_energy]

http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

Worth a read.

I think Audio is a bit like cooking - some science and also a lot of art is involved to get it sounding just right. Music, does have a strong emotional content after all.

 

[onlyconnect]

I think Audio is a bit like cooking - some science and also a lot of art is involved to get it sounding just right. Music, does have a strong emotional content after all. Not something that is 100% science and measurements.

I can see that argument would apply to making an instrument. But a hi-fi isn't meant to be an instrument, but to reproduce the sound of instruments. Ideally it should neither add nor subtract to the sound of the original. That is engineering rather than art, unless you mean the design of the case?

Taking up your cooking analogy, the hi-fi is the knife and fork, to transport the hopefully delectable dish from plate to tastebuds.

Tim

 

[Ashley James]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fJmmDkvQyc

Ash

 

[Joe P]

Ash,

I doubt that subjectivism, drivelly or not, has done in audio, but I do agree that nonsense and pseudoscience have added nothing to the industry.

The issue, as you noted in your last sentence, is that people have many more places where they can spend their dough (e.g., home theatre, video games, computers, online porn) and those other places can also look after most audio needs (except the online porn), so dedicated two-channel only audio took the hit.

Joe

 

[Tony L]

We have published more information about our products including measurements than any other manufacturer on the planet.

The problem for us was that whatever we published didn't suit the prejudices of the silly subjective drivel merchants. Some discount anything they don't want to believe in the most irrational ways and I can't deal with it.

"Power amplifiers: High speed, linear, analogue bipolar, 75 wpc for the tweeters and 250 wpc for the bass drivers. System distortion typically better than 0.002%."

So, is that RMS or some fleeting peak power rating? Define "better than 0.002%, i.e. can we have an output level with that please.

"Bass driver: Very high power handling, long excursion 6.5" paper cone drive unit with 1.5" voice coil and exceptionally broad bandwidth to enable a phase perfect crossover at 3.4 kHz. Bass extension better than - 6dB @ 60Hz."

Is that the manufacturer's spec for the bass driver or an actual measurement of your specific implementation? If the latter please qualify it.

"System Amplitude Response: better than + or - 2 dB 100 Hz - 20 kHz."

Measured how? Is that an in anechoic or in-room response, if it's in room is it full, half or quarter space? I'm also assuming you mean 'frequency response for the speaker system', the above could just as easily be read as an amplifier spec, and if so why does it crap-out at 100Hz?

I think it's the dismissal of silly subjective drivel that has made HDD such a widely read Forum, they already have almost as many uniques as PF. Here the difficulty is that the arguments are between those who believe the nonsense side of audio and others with a reasonable understanding and, as Alan Sircom says, you'll never change them and the two will never agree.

You seem to lack the technical understanding to interpret your web stats - I notice on your HDDA advertorial site you have the gall to compare it to pfm as, even after I explained it to you by email, you seem to wish to contrast an all-encompassing "visits" figure of around 1000 with pfm's member visits of 1300-1400 per day! I'll say it again slowly: that is *MEMBER VISITS*, i.e. people who have registered, posted etc and are part of the community, not rubber-neckers, spam-bots, spiders etc, and with a forum as sick as HDDA that ratio is anything up to 95/5, i.e. something like 30 guests / spiders / spambots logged on to one registered member (as it is right now!). pfm's ratio of guests to members is far more healthy, typically around 60/40 to 65/35.

 

[arthur]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fJmmDkvQyc

Ash

Hi Ash..
How alarmingly accurate

 

[Plutox]

But if your original comment had been less cryptic it would have been obvious that you weren't conducting a comparative dem of CD players, which is what I was talking about.

My apologies - I will attempt to be clearer next time

 

[onlyconnect]

"Power amplifiers: High speed, linear, analogue bipolar, 75 wpc for the tweeters and 250 wpc for the bass drivers. System distortion typically better than 0.002%."

So, is that RMS or some fleeting peak power rating? Define "better than 0.002%, i.e. can we have an output level with that please.

"Bass driver: Very high power handling, long excursion 6.5" paper cone drive unit with 1.5" voice coil and exceptionally broad bandwidth to enable a phase perfect crossover at 3.4 kHz. Bass extension better than - 6dB @ 60Hz."

Is that the manufacturer's spec for the bass driver or an actual measurement of your specific implementation? If the latter please qualify it.

"System Amplitude Response: better than + or - 2 dB 100 Hz - 20 kHz."

Measured how? Is that an in anechoic or in-room response, if it's in room is it full, half or quarter space? I'm also assuming you mean 'frequency response for the speaker system', the above could just as easily be read as an amplifier spec, and if so why does it crap-out at 100Hz?

I agree these specs are vague. Since when did "Very high power handling" qualify as a spec?

Tim

 

[Mescalito]

Plutox,


I would have thought that the reason would be self-evident — I have no idea what you use.

The other reason I'm curious stems from what you wrote previously: "Some very professionally conducted tests in which I participated demonstrated that CD was essentially transparent nearly twenty years ago."

If that's the case, I would have thought you would have an inexpensive CD player, not that the three you own are astronomically expensive. But I think the general point is still valid — why own any CD player more expensive than, say, a $200 Sony if all CD players are essentially transparent?

Joe

Bling and the urge to have expensive toys, in many cases, Joe.

My old Phillips CDP, bought in 1989, sounds just as good as my Linn Ikemi, which sounds just as good as the Sony DVD player.

But guess which one sat in the hi fi rack.

Chris

 

[Mescalito]

I think Audio is a bit like cooking - some science and also a lot of art is involved to get it sounding just right. Music, does have a strong emotional content after all.

Yes, but what does the motional content of the music have to do with hi-fi?

All a hi-fi system can ever do is degrade the music. It can never enhance it. If it could, composers/performers would include the hi-fi system in the score, surely.

All you can ever hope for is that the hi fi system does not get in the way of the music too much.

Chris

 

[Basil]

why own any CD player more expensive than, say, a $200 Sony if all CD players are essentially transparent?

Why own a Rolex over a cheap digital watch that will keep better time?

 

[Werner]

But a hi-fi isn't meant to be an instrument, but to reproduce the sound of instruments.

Is it? Really? Please think this completely through and then refine your definition of a hi-fi's purpose.

Ideally it should neither add nor subtract to the sound of the original.

OK. A serious question then: what is the sound of the original?



Hint: if engineering is the discipline of realising something that complies to a given set of requirements (it is), then what if the set of requirements itself is broken?

 

[positive_energy]

I can see that argument would apply to making an instrument. But a hi-fi isn't meant to be an instrument, but to reproduce the sound of instruments. Ideally it should neither add nor subtract to the sound of the original. That is engineering rather than art, unless you mean the design of the case?

Taking up your cooking analogy, the hi-fi is the knife and fork, to transport the hopefully delectable dish from plate to tastebuds.

Tim

What I am saying is that Hi-fi is an instrument too, as is your room, etc. It all comes together to make a sound that you like or not. Science only gets you so far - the rest is cooking. Scientific instruments cannot measure emotional impact.

 

[sergeauckland]

What I am saying is that Hi-fi is an instrument too, as is your room, etc. It all comes together to make a sound that you like or not. Science only gets you so far - the rest is cooking. Scientific instruments cannot measure emotional impact.

But HiFi doesn't have any emotional impact. The music has that, not the HiFi. The HiFi is the tool by which the music plays, and as such should, in my view, just put out a bigger version of what went in, no more, and no less.

S.

 

[Plutox]

The trouble has been that is didn't suit the snake oil salesman who found that by discrediting measurement, preventing proper comparison and "tapping their feet" to the music, it was easier to sell what they had on offer.

The emboldened bit is key. I couldn't really give two hoots for measurement - for no other reason than the fact that for quite a long time now, most (electronic) kit has measured adequately* well.

It is the downer that many audiophiles have on side-by-side, instantaneous comparison tests that has allowed some of the most insidious, overpriced crap to get accepted by the audiophile community on the grounds of it being "musical". It isn't a musical instrument, FFS, it's an amplifier whose job is to reproduce what's there!

I have nothing against those who feel that some flea-powered tube amplifier gives them what they (think they) like, but once we get to the basic honesty provided by proper instant listening comparisons, a lot of the shortcomings of some of the more ridiculous kit become exposed for what they are. Largs of Holborn had the right idea with their massive "comparator console". That just had to go if the industry was to stand any chance of flogging a £2k 50W amplifier alongside a £200 one. And when the country was on a roll and there was money to burn, it suited all parties.

While a return to proper comparative tests would not suit many areas of the domestic audio sector as it now exists, it would result in a return to a fundamental honesty that would stop "audiophile" from being one step below "train-spotter" in the social hierarchy.

* Adequate, as defined by the Rolls Royce salesman's use of the term.

 

[Basil]

that would stop "audiophile" from being one step below "train-spotter" in the social hierarchy.

Only one step?

At least trainspotters get the ocasional mention on comedy shows, pretty sure the only time audiophiles got it in the neck was one episode of 'Not the Nine o'clock News' back in the 80's...

Before that we have to go back to the 50's and Flanders & Swann...