Audio Science Review

[Primare Knob]

 

Audio science review is a site that is mainly focused on taking measurements on as many digital audio devices as possible.

 

I have browsed through their reviews quite a lot. They seem to have a strong opinion about high end marketing and tweaks but always show the measurements of a device. This then gets debated, and more than often remarks are made about the author not making or fully understanding the proper measurements.

 

I have bought a Topping D50 based upon its review, and although a likeable device, I can't really fault, but it just doesn't rock my boat either.

 

Are these measurements reliable enough to have faith in, and are measurements the only thing that matters. Is a device that measures cleanly a good device?

 

 

 

 

[Ittaku]

23 hours ago, Primare Knob said:

Are these measurements reliable enough to have faith in, and are measurements the only thing that matters?

These measurements definitely "matter" but they are also definitely NOT the only thing that matters. Unfortunately we don't truly have any reliable measurements that tell us how good something sounds to human hearing and whether it sounds realistic or not - we just measure what we can measure and that's only part of the picture.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Ittaku

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Primare Knob said:

Are these measurements reliable enough to have faith in, and are measurements the only thing that matters. Is a device that measures cleanly a good device?

I do wonder whether they actually listen?  More likely confirmation bias is occurring i.e. it is measuring well therefore it must sound good. 

[Ittaku]

In the late 70s and 80s when solid state technology had matured people chased vanishingly low levels of Total Harmonic Distortion as the holy grail. These were some of the worst sounding amplifiers ever created since they forgot to attend to anything else that really mattered to the sound. DACs aren't quite the same thing though so it's not like the better dynamic range and signal to noise ratio are making them sound worse, but the cautionary tale regarding fixing just numbers still stands.

[n0bleINtP]

37 minutes ago, Primare Knob said:

Are these measurements reliable enough to have faith in, and are measurements the only thing that matters. Is a device that measures cleanly a good device?

Sufficient to find counter examples?

e.g.  find equipment that measures well but performs badly - ie. most consumer solid state amplification products from the 80s and earlier. 
and also:  find equipment that measures poorly but sounds excellent

I actually tend to get interested in the better amplifiers that can only claim 0.2% THD or whatever rather than some smaller number.  It is one factor in the trade off in its design, i.e. the higher number was (grudgingly) accepted in order to improve some other (more important) aspect of the sound. 

PS:  Ittaku - you beat me to it!
 

[Addicted to music]

1 hour ago, Primare Knob said:

 

Audio science review is a site that is mainly focused on taking measurements on as many digital audio devices as possible.

 

I have browsed through their reviews quite a lot. They seem to have a strong opinion about high end marketing and tweaks but always show the measurements of a device. This then gets debated, and more than often remarks are made about the author not making or fully understanding the proper measurements.

 

The Author of that site is probably the only one with a $30k-50k US  AP555 Audio Precision Analyser.  If you don’t agree with his measurements then you should check out the AP website on the instructions on how to set up the AP555.

There are other engineers on that site who probably want to know more,  demanding certain procedures so they see how a device under the spotlight measures from the way they would set it up.  

Just remember he is independent, he doesn’t get paid for the review or the measurements performed and doesn’t advertise.   So this is subjective as it gets.  You can also see with certain products that the measurements picks up 60Hz hum when the product haven’t had basic grounding implemented, showing how dangerous and cheap (cost cutting)  

 

1 hour ago, Primare Knob said:

 

 

I have bought a Topping D50 based upon its review, and although a likeable device, I can't really fault, but it just doesn't rock my boat either.

 

 

I also have the D50 due to that review.  I consider myself lucky to own that unit because it only cost $300AU landed.  I can now use this as a reference for DACs.

A well designed product that measure well will never “rock your boat”.   It never will.  Only those with instruments like the AP555 will begin to understand how to correlate the measurement with listening to gauge the performance as a whole for that product.

The expectation of audiophiles is they want “ A larger soundstage, more dynamic, detailed sound, liquid SQ , etc etc. measurement is a whole different avenue to gauge a product,  basically it tells you how a product performs  correctly.  And you can see that the D50 debunks all the myth about getting reclocking devices and “linear psu” etc

1 hour ago, Primare Knob said:

 

Are these measurements reliable enough to have faith in, 

 

Yes 

 

 

1 hour ago, Primare Knob said:

 

and are measurements the only thing that matters. Is a device that measures cleanly a good device?

 

Yes

 

if it measures well then it’s doing it’s job properly,  this doesn’t necessary have to agree with the way you listen to it work, because from this point onwards it’s subjective and your ears demand certain distortion so you can agree with it.

Measure counts on every product, this is how most gauge devices.   In reprographics is different because it’s visual, an out of calibrated devices is visual and you can see the difference so that’s objective,  with sound it’s subjective....you are relying on your own or someone’s else’s descriptive preference.

[Addicted to music]

1 hour ago, Snoopy8 said:

I do wonder whether they actually listen?  More likely confirmation bias is occurring i.e. it is measuring well therefore it must sound good. 

Admir does a listening session for most product he tests,  mainly near the conclusion.

[MrBurns84]

Its actually a good reference site.  That being said, i dont necessarily subscribe to the fact that if a product measures really well, it means that it should sound great.  Room interaction will skew these results eitherway.   Amir does give us some great insight to the quality control and engineering that has gone into making the gear.  

But then again, audio is very subjective and we all have our personal biases as to what sounds good vs one that doesnt.

[sir sanders zingmore]

11 hours ago, Ittaku said:

In the late 70s and 80s when solid state technology had matured people chased vanishingly low levels of Total Harmonic Distortion as the holy grail. These were some of the worst sounding amplifiers ever created 

Although you’ve made it clear that you aren’t doing so, the conclusion that many people jump to is that the amps sounded bad because of the low THD. 

I suspect there were many other reasons. I’m not technical enough to know whether the pursuit of low THD caused other issues but I’d be very surprised if the low THD itself was the reason for the amps sounding bad. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by Sir Sanders Zingmore
Clarity

[Ittaku]

1 hour ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

The conclusuion that many people jump to is that the amps sounded bad because of the low THD. 

I suspect there were many other reasons. I’m not technical enough to know whether the pursuit of low THD caused other issues but I’d be very surprised if the low THD itself was the reason for the amps sounding bad. 

And you'll note I did not blame the low THD. The part of my post you didn't quote was

11 hours ago, Ittaku said:

since they forgot to attend to anything else that really mattered to the sound.

It's easy to obtain extremely low THD figures with industrial levels of negative feedback with the piddliest garbage amplifier but measuring low THD at 1kHz 1W power into a fixed 8 ohm resistor is not remotely what reproducing music is about.

[acg]

Meh.  I struggle with sites that have an agenda, regardless of the agenda, and ASR is one of them.

 

Vanishingly low THD is so low on the 'things to chase for good sound' charts it is a complete red-herring yet it is something easy to measure and makes a nice graph...0.05 thd has to sound  so much worse than 0.0005% right?  Wrong.

 

 

9 hours ago, Addicted to music said:

The Author of that site is probably the only one with a $30k-50k US  AP555 Audio Precision Analyser.

 

I have an audio analyser that competes with that AP on specs...does that make me an expert too?

 

 

52 minutes ago, Sir Sanders Zingmore said:

The conclusuion that many people jump to is that the amps sounded bad because of the low THD. 

 

How the circuit wins that low THD is most often the issue, not the fact that the THD is low.  We cannot discern even relatively high levels of THD, let alone the levels that any competent electronics are capable of producing.

 

 

Some people think that our acoustic system needs to attempt to be perfectly faithful to the recording without adding any more distortion than possible.  Some people think that the recording is imperfect in the first place and that their aim in listening to music is enjoyment, regardless of what the numbers and graphs say.  I say both are right...whatever floats your boat...just don't jam it down the others throat too hard.  This objectivist vs subjectivist BS floating around forums and the moment is shortsighted and toxic. 

[sir sanders zingmore]

7 minutes ago, Ittaku said:

And you'll note I did not blame the low THD. The part of my post you didn't quote was

I didn’t mean to say that you were blaming low THD. I can see how it may have appeared that way though, apologies. I’ll edit my post. 

 

I was using it as it as an example of how others do. 

 

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, acg said:

...just don't jam it down the others throat too hard.  This objectivist vs subjectivist BS floating around forums and the moment is shortsighted and toxic. 

Well said!  It is the trying to jam their own perspective down each other throats that has caused the grief.  

[Martykt]

49 minutes ago, acg said:

Meh.  I struggle with sites that have an agenda, regardless of the agenda, and ASR is one of them.

 

Vanishingly low THD is so low on the 'things to chase for good sound' charts it is a complete red-herring yet it is something easy to measure and makes a nice graph...0.05 thd has to sound  so much worse than 0.0005% right?  Wrong.

 

 

 

I have an audio analyser that competes with that AP on specs...does that make me an expert too?

 

 

 

How the circuit wins that low THD is most often the issue, not the fact that the THD is low.  We cannot discern even relatively high levels of THD, let alone the levels that any competent electronics are capable of producing.

 

 

Some people think that our acoustic system needs to attempt to be perfectly faithful to the recording without adding any more distortion than possible.  Some people think that the recording is imperfect in the first place and that their aim in listening to music is enjoyment, regardless of what the numbers and graphs say.  I say both are right...whatever floats your boat...just don't jam it down the others throat too hard.  This objectivist vs subjectivist BS floating around forums and the moment is shortsighted and toxic. 

+1 well said !!

 

The simple truth is while measurements can be very useful it's very important to realise that they only tell you only what they are measuring and should not be taken as an absolute when reviewing a product.

The full story can quite often be very different.

 

[wen]

i remember a review of an amplifier by John Atkinson in stereophlie, this amp " sounds way better than the measurements suggest"

[Primare Knob]

i remember a review of an amplifier by John Atkinson in stereophlie, this amp " sounds way better than the measurements suggest"

I also remember stereophile reviews of equipment that I have tried and would ask myself what they are talking about.

Not really reliable either.

[wen]

@Primare Knob, agree with your statement, the key being ,listen for yourself and make up your own mind

[Misternavi]

16 hours ago, Primare Knob said:

I have bought a Topping D50 based upon its review,

I also read the hype about it and want to try it out. 
What didn't you like about it? Why doesn't it "rock your boat"?

[Lil Caesar]

I have just received my Topping D70.

 

It is replacing a NAD C510.

 

All I can comment on at this stage is the packing and apparent build quality of the device, both of which are quire impressive. 

The small form facter aluminum shell is very cleanly machined with excellent fit and on the whole its weight belies its size.

 

I was drawn to the D70 based on the use of dual AKM 4497 dacs and balanced output, its price made the proposition impossible to ignore.

 

The only online review of this device  is courtesy of the ASR website, and although I agree measurements do not tell the full story, they are particularly reassuring for a DAC.

 

I felt I could buy with confidence as my Marantz pre-pro uses older AKM 44xx dacs and I am very pleased with the way it renders audio.

[Addicted to music]

19 minutes ago, Lil Caesar said:

I have just received my Topping D70.

 

It is replacing a NAD C510.

 

All I can comment on at this stage is the packing and apparent build quality of the device, both of which are quire impressive. 

The small form facter aluminum shell is very cleanly machined with excellent fit and on the whole its weight belies its size.

 

I was drawn to the D70 based on the use of dual AKM 4497 dacs and balanced output, its price made the proposition impossible to ignore.

 

The only online review of this device  is courtesy of the ASR website, and although I agree measurements do not tell the full story, they are particularly reassuring for a DAC.

 

I felt I could buy with confidence as my Marantz pre-pro uses older AKM 44xx dacs and I am very pleased with the way it renders audio.

 As you well know just because it measures well doesn’t necessary mean it’s going to “rock your boat”.     So don’t bother placing it in the classified here just PM me and I’ll take it of your hands.....

[wanta911]

I feel a car analogy coming on.....so I won't go there 

 

BTW, I also have a D70 on it's way. 

[Eggmeister]

5 minutes ago, wanta911 said:

I feel a car analogy coming on.....so I won't go there 

 

BTW, I also have a D70 on it's way. 

I fear a magnepan post most of all.

 

[sir sanders zingmore]

I bought a Topping dac based on ASR recommendations. It was cheap enough just as a punt. 

 

I compared it to a couple of far more expensive “trust your ears” type DACs. 

 

The difference was not subtle, the expensive DACs were much better. Until......I decided to trust my ears and not my sight. Then the differences all but vanished. 

Sold the fancy dac, the topping is one of my best-ever audio purchases. 

[Primare Knob]

I also read the hype about it and want to try it out. 
What didn't you like about it? Why doesn't it "rock your boat"?

The best way I can describe it is, that it perfectly reads the "musical" lines, but doesn't read between the lines.

My other way of describing it would be, that I don't like Sabre DAC's but that would be a bit far fetched since it is just one component in a whole chain.

I am interesting in the D70 mentioned here as well, as I seem to favour the AK DAC's more, but again, is just one component in a whole chain.

[Primare Knob]

Returning to a Stereophile review about the PrimaLuna Prologue Premium.

This has a positive review and I do like this amp a lot.

Stereophile measurements shows that it isn't perfect but measures as well as a tube amp can. I wonder what ASR would say about measuring an amp like this.

Most of their measurements are about the digital side of a large variety of components, but each device has its purpose.

I was surprised by their measurements of Audio-GD products, which seem to measure rather poor, disregard his respect for the engineering part of these products. I personally do like the Master 7 DAC.

Their post about HDMI is an interesting one to read as well.