John Atkinson no longer editor of Stereophile.

I've heard/owned a lot of great measuring gear that didn't sound all that good in the long run. I'm not saying measurements should be ignored, but I do think too much emphasis is placed on some metrics -- a washboard-flat frequency response being one of them.

Edit: I also own/owned great-measuring gear that continues to sound great.

 

Performance specifications are not about how something sounds. Measurements are done to compare independent measurements with performance specifications that are published by the manufacturer's .

It allows us to read what the manufacture claims about their product(s) and to verify that these claims are true or not.

 

As if we have to prove that measurements are important? Why would we even approach it from that perspective? Of course measurements are important in a technology / electronic / physics based industry where performance is directly related to design, architecture and component choice --- of which the quality of the result is borne out of both measuring and subjectively listening. NOTICE I said "both" for anyone that wants to peg as being one sided in my assertion.

That's the funny thing about these threads -- they develop from a premise that we have to convince that measurements are important, because the implication from some is that they are either marginally necessary or unnecessary in some cases. What's most interesting is that those who dig their heels on questioning the need for measurements are typically those closest to the industry.......

I don't claim to understand it --- after a 15 year hiatus and getting back into serious audio a couple years back it's something that has me a little puzzled. I mean in all my endeavors / hobbies that are based in technology / electronics / physics (astronomy, computers, semiconductors) of course measurements and data are an important part of judging equipment quality, as well as subjective assessment. No?

These threads have always seemed odd to me, I still don't get why those who have been on the board for so long, who are close to the industry are peculiarly against the notion of measuring? What am I missing? How can measuring NOT be a valuable tool?

 

I never look at any "measurement's" of any of my gear. I will look at certain spec's, such as a speaker's sensitivity or impedance so that I am aware of what I believe that I should be knowledgeable of.

Other than that, my only concern is how is sounds. I either like it or I don't.

 

So are you saying that measurements are not important, or that you personally don't use them and they are not important to you?

Of course it's the latter --- but what is your answer to the first part of my question?

 

Of-course there is no right or wrong answer. Fact is that looking on what can be measured ignores other aspects of the performance so distorts the picture, I will add here a favourite quote by another Stereophile writer who sees things a bit differently:

"Our other great enemy is something I call the Tyranny of Frequency Response: an attitude that ignores the fact that there exist many different aspects to playback performance and that, in the absence of gear that does everything well – which does not exist – individual listeners should be free to prioritize those aspects as they wish. Traditionally, audio reviewers have exalted the notion of flat frequency response – or, if you will, the notion of freedom from "colorations" – as being of paramount importance. That may well be true for some listeners, but not for all; the idea that, say, dynamics and impact are of paramount importance is equally valid.
To the person whose musical enjoyment hangs on the thread of "neutrality," a Quad ESL63 is correct and an Auditorium 23 Solovox is flawed. To the person who savors tactile excitement, the Solovox is correct and the Quad is flawed – distorted, even! Both points of view are legitimate."

 

I believe that I have already stated my position on the importance of measurements (see my previous quote below).

As for myself personally, I haven't the foggiest idea what the actual measurements are on any piece of gear that I own or have owned. Simply don't care how anything measures.

I also don't do a chemical analysis of my dinner. I look first to see if it is recognizable as being what it is supposed to be. Then I taste it, to see if my taste buds agree. If they do, I eat it.

If something sounds good, I listen to it, if not, then I don't.

I don't find it to be all that complicated.

 

I agree- measurements and subjective evaluation are important. I think that the pushback comes when measurements are asserted to be the entirety of things, and dispositive of sonic outcomes.

 

I follow the rule that states: Not everything that can be measured matters, and not everything that matters can be measured.

That said, on the subject of the original posting, I see this as the beginning of the end of Stereophile. John Atkinson kept the flame of J. Gordon Holt alive through sheer will (in the face of so many ownership changes). Can Jim? I don't know, but his job will be a lot tougher than John's was. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.....

 

For example, I have the Ortofon 2M Bronze and the 2M black cartridge. Here are measured frequency response curves for both the Bronze and the Black cartridge, which I note, sound nothing alike.

I don't know about anyone else, but I could not ascertain any useful information by looking at these frequency response curves as to how either of these cartridges sound or what their differences might be.

FREQUENCY RESPONSE - 2M BRONZE

Red - Outer grooves White - Inner grooves

2M BLACK

Red - Outer grooves White - Inner grooves

This is simply my point concerning measurements.

 

Now that formulation of the sentiment I could agree with more. And of course, what is inadequate also depends. If one unit has channel separation of 80 dB across the whole frequency range and another unit 70 dB, that might not be relevant. The frequency deviations in @SandAndGlass post could be easily noticed with a test tone, but probably not with music.

 

Again, my takeaway is that measurements are not important to you with your gear. Understood. That is clear.

My earlier question of whether you think they are important overall though has gone unanswered --- meaning do you think they are important to include as part of reviews, gear specs, and are they an important part for others perhaps to gauge gear performance in addition to subjective assessment?

Or are you saying that since they are not important to you that you deem them unimportant overall?

 

Another valid point, a test tone is not music. The ability of a device to play one single frequency at a time, does not reflect what the same device would sound like, playing complex musical passages.

 

I don't understand what about the statement that I have made, that was not completely clear?

Gear only has to measure up to what the manufacture states that is obligated to measure up to.

These are the statements that a manufacturer provides when advertising a product for sale.

When an objective third party duplicates these measurements in a laboratory setting, then the specific claims that a manufacturer provides can be ascertained.

Since most consumer products are sold with claims make by the manufacturer, the primary reasson for testing is to confirm the validity of those claims, regardless of what that product may be.

When I read reviews of a product, I am looking for those metric's that are important to myself.

Information is important to different people, and for different reasons.

Something that might be of primary interest to a product engineer, might be of little importance to me.

The measurements are important to who ever may think of them as being important. I don't answer questions as to what might be important to someone other than myself.

I have no way of knowing what may be important to someone else or why it may be important to them.

As such, I don't speak for anyone other than myself. Which is what I clearly stated. I spoke of what only was or was not important to me.

I have a professional sound dB meter. I will use it to calibrate the loudness of a surround sound system to a test tone, so that all the speaker's and amps have been volume equalized.

I will also, on occasion, turn the meter on as a curiosity of how loud a SPL I am listening to my system at. I might take a reading on both "A" & "C" scales to see how much bass is contributing to the overall volume.

Beyond that, I have no use for measuring devices. I never use any active or automatic room correction or equalization.

These are simply my own personal preferences. They are not advice to other's as to how to set up or listen to their own systems inside of their own homes.

Beyond the system DAC, my system's are all pure analog. I typically will play two or three systems at the same time. I run the systems so that I get the sound that I am after.

When it sounds good to my ears, then I have achieved my objective.

As I have said, I don't look at measurements. They have no importance to me and what it is that I do.

Other's may decide what is important to them and do as they wish.

I have no opinion as to whether or not measurements are important to a review. Some review's include measurements, other's do not. For the ones that do, they are there for those that might be of interest to them.

 

OK thanks. Just curious as to your opinion.

Me? I personally use data / measurements if it exists - why not - plus of course I use my ears. Why not? I also have no problem stating that I think it is important that data / measurements be provided to the end consumer to consume them if they wish. I don't have any issue offering my opinion there.

Let's face it -- do you think the designers, builders, testers are making / building this new equipment with just their ears and not measuring as one of the indicators of success, or for the purpose of filling out the specification? Of course they are..... to me providing those measurements to any consumer that does wish to use them is a natural extension / progression. Not providing them is what seems strange to me - but that is the engineer in me, and everyones needs are different.

 

I'm glad JA is staying on, he's a good guy.

At the end of Stereophile speaker reviews, I always fast-forward to the one chart that matters (to me): the frequency response one. I'm looking for a flat midrange, without peaky or elevated treble. Then, I might audition the speaker if it's available in my area. But I could care less whether, say, an amp has .005 or .0001% distortion; makes zero difference, seemingly, in whether I'll like the sound or not. I guess I'm a subjectivist; I'm pretty convinced they don't yet know how or what to measure what's really essential in the performance of electronics for the enjoyment of music. I'll take Art Dudley, Sam Tellig or Herb Reichert's take on an amp over any measurements.

 

That's fine. As I said, something that might have meaning to a design engineer might, and probably does have a different meaning than to someone like me.

I provided two graphs of two phono cartridges that I own. Both cartridges sound different to me. Yet, looking at either of the graphs, yield's me no information as to what either of them sound like.

If I was an engineer who designs phono cartridges, these graphs might mean something to me.

Beyond that. I commented that I run multiple system most of the time. I have both new and vintage gear, tube and SS gear, home and pro audio gear.

What any individual piece of gear might sound like by itself is not how the overall system might sound with that particular piece of gear in the system.

My concern is the overall sound.

B.T.W., after my equipment profile, I put together a tour of my system room, with photos and descriptions. It might give you a better idea of the different things that I do.

I typically listen to a sound system in more of an unconventional way.

 

Great quote, and very true in my experience.

 

We tend to agree on most issues but Herb Reichert seems to be an exception. I find most of his reviews to be lacking in substance. Dudley and, to a lesser extent, Tellig can be guilty of the odd howler too. I much prefer Paul Seydor.

 

OK how about an edit:

"If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- I don't give a damn."

 

If it sounds good and measures bad, get your hearing checked!

 

.

Sam Tellig is long gone from Stereophile. Herb Reichert is the only Stereophile reviewer that I never took seriously.

 

Herb is must-read for me

 

Yeah, he's real good with words!

 

To me it only propagates the flawed notion that the sound to ones ears and measurements are mutually exclusive and have no relation.

When in reality nothing could be further than the truth.

To each his own --- I will hold out my far-fetched belief that physics and measurements still have some relation to performance --- I know, silly idealist, where does one get such crazy notions!