advertisement


The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio

Status
Not open for further replies.
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

Whilst I agree that subjectivism alone didn't do in for audio, it certainly started the rot. When scribblers like Paul Messenger started writing about stuff from a totally subjective point of view, with no regard or seeming knowledge of the engineering and technology, they made complete fools of themselves.

At about the same time, the whole Linn nonsense took off, where even the presence of a telephone in the room was supposed to ruin the sound, where Dealers refused to sell a customer something if they didn't have or were also buying the complementary bits. Where Dealers were refused a product if they also sold certain others, where Dealers were trained not to do comparative demonstrations of loudspeakers and so on.

Looking at various show reports, I don't see any move towards sensible products, just more high-priced bling and outrageous designs. It's no wonder to me that "normal" people just don't think of HiFi these days.

S.
 
"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.

The power quoted is RMS, but given the duty cycle in music, some quote twice that, which would be the peaks. Distortion is what you get while you're playing music, so not fudged. They won't give 250 Watts into a resistor but they will give 500 Watt peaks playing music, which equates to 110dB@1 M both driven with sub and about 10dB more for peaks.

"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.

I've never seen any claims from any manufacturer that distinguish one drive unit from another and there are bogus claims out there, so we give an indication that what we're using is at the top end of the scale, which means more linear travel, power handling etc. SPL claims are verified by the manufacturer and measurements are made by us in free space using both Bruel and Kjaer and Computer based systems. They are as our claims are, conservative and verified with the manufacturers who we work closely with.


"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 is more a case of your lack of understanding than any shortfall on our part Tone. If a driver is -6dB @60, it has to be rolling off somewhere higher, in this case 100 Hz, so pretty much what 6" drivers do and the right shape for the Sub which gives -6dB @ 30 Hz.

In my experience the only amplitude response figures it is fair to quote are free field or anechoic. However these measurements are practically meaningless and people read too much into them. You don't hear quite large changes.

I've known a reviewer decide that an under-magneted 5" Two way had more bass than two 10" per side in floor standers, because he couldn't distinguish between lack of control and the opposite.

Most people talk about bright speakers having peaks at high frequencies, which is nonsense because it is almost always the tweeter being audible through the bass driver below the crossover point and often because the design uses 1st order filters.

What sensible potential customers do is ring us up or email for explanation of some aspect of the speaker performance that concerns them and we give truthful answers.



I'm not even going to argue webstats with you because they're not mine and I don't understand them but I have verified the figures with an IT professional.
 
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.

Mine has plenty of emotional impact - one of the reasons I enjoy listening to it so much. It really conveys the energy and emotion of a performance.

Music is more art than science.
 
Whilst I agree that subjectivism alone didn't do in for audio, it certainly started the rot. When scribblers like Paul Messenger started writing about stuff from a totally subjective point of view, with no regard or seeming knowledge of the engineering and technology, they made complete fools of themselves.

At about the same time, the whole Linn nonsense took off, where even the presence of a telephone in the room was supposed to ruin the sound, where Dealers refused to sell a customer something if they didn't have or were also buying the complementary bits. Where Dealers were refused a product if they also sold certain others, where Dealers were trained not to do comparative demonstrations of loudspeakers and so on.

Looking at various show reports, I don't see any move towards sensible products, just more high-priced bling and outrageous designs. It's no wonder to me that "normal" people just don't think of HiFi these days.

S.

I well remember the problems Hi Fi news faced as their sales dropped ( I was one of many invited to meeting to discuss the problems) and at the same time I remember the frustration of readers, who visited us, as they read stupid subjective reviews for ludicrously expensive gear that they might buy if there was information they could trust available. Instead many people cancelled their subscriptions in frustration.

IMO and I was there from the start, the Subjective thing caused immense bitterness and is at the heart of most rows on Forums now.

Ash
 
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

So you're saying that when these parts are assembled into an amp, CD player or whatever, they gain a form of artificial intelligence and can 'understand' the emotion present in any recording and then adapt to enhance it?

Wow...

I'll have some of what you're smoking please!

And where is the human soul located?

You tell me? If you have to resort to the supernatural then it's a pretty sure sign your argument is is on very shaky ground indeed...
 
Baz,

Why own a Rolex over a cheap digital watch that will keep better time?
That's more akin to saying why does a punter own a $15k table when a $200 CD player measures better.

My point -- if we're sticking with a watch analogy -- is why own a $500 Seiko quartz if a $15 Casio tells time as accurately.

Joe
 
I'm not even going to argue webstats with you because they're not mine and I don't understand them but I have verified the figures with an IT professional.

If you are not prepared to "argue webstats" then please remove the inaccurate and misleading content / spin you posted on HDDA relating to my site. I am an IT professional, and, trust me, there is a huge, huge difference between 'unique visits' and 'registered member visits'! If you were to compare like to like (how many actual registered members log in each day) based upon what I can see HDDA would be lucky to get out of double figures!

I'll leave it to others to dissect your product specifications to their own satisfaction - it is not really my place to become embroiled in such things.
 
Baz,


That's more akin to saying why does a punter own a $15k table when a $200 CD player measures better.

My point -- if we're sticking with a watch analogy -- is why own a $500 Seiko quartz if a $15 Casio tells time as accurately.

Joe

Basically we're into 'a fool and his money' territory here?

I've never been one for 'fads' or 'fashion' although I did fancy that Omega of Patrick’s... so I'm not totally immune...
 
Baz,


That's more akin to saying why does a punter own a $15k table when a $200 CD player measures better.

My point -- if we're sticking with a watch analogy -- is why own a $500 Seiko quartz if a $15 Casio tells time as accurately.

Joe

Why indeed. If accuracy is the criterion, then why indeed. However, as we all know, a watch isn't just a tool, it's also a piece of jewelry. Therefore, there is a certain sense in a $500 watch if it looks a lot nicer than a $15 watch even though t may not be any better at time-keeping.

What is completely beyond me is buying a $5000 mechanical watch that keeps worse time than a $15 Casio. That is then totally jewelry and the tool element doesn't figure much.

For the record, I wear a Junghans radio watch. It may be childish, but I like to make sure the BBC's time pips are accurate!

S.
 
Music is all art, HiFi is all science.

S,

Exactly!

Hi fi is a tool and all it can do is to as accurately as technically possible reproduce what has been recorded, no more and no less.

Also, the better amplifiers, DACs and preamps, are virtually impossible to tell apart, which leaves, as Tony has said, the speakers as the weakest link.

I first became interested in hi fi in the fifties, I heard the ESL57s when they first appeared and even then, everyone knew the speakers were the weakest link and that they should be chosen with the greatest care.

The subjective BS brigade had a turntable to sell, so they managed to discredit the speaker idea and to establish the source first instead and you can see the damage that's done by reading item's posts. ;)
 
Music is all art, HiFi is all science.

S,

Why do I get the impression that to get this message across to some would involve writing it on a piece of paper, wrapping it around a brick and repeatedly hitting them in the back of the head with it?


I am an IT professional of long-standing

So why are you willing to let item post such rubbish about how networks and computers work without comment?

You've never let Ashley get away with the same?
 
Not really - you can measure a lot of musical qualities using scientific analysis, gets you a long way but does not cater for the emotional content. Same goes for hifi, photography, etc. etc.

But that has nothing to do with equipment to replay music where your measurements are to tell you how much the recorded information is being distorted. Hence distortion measurements :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top