Ep. 32: “But... the Nakamichi Dragon!”

[@AudioScienceReview]

Reposting with youtube link now: While there is truism in a number of things Brent mentions, there are some wrong assumptions. Danny has never shown a ground plane measurement much less stitch them to the gated measurements. The latter as I am sure you know, has highly reduced resolution even above 200 Hz. When you are in the business of selling speakers as Danny is, you better show the full response including bass. Not doing so results in decades of selling a speaker with this disastrous bass response: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b5WnYXSrqNioatEsi=vemTOQlgw6W1grGM And no, it is not about acquisition device. We all understand you can use anything to measure a speaker. But you well know that room reflections corrupt bass response so you must either use anechoic room, stitched ground plane measurement response, or Klippel Near-field scanner with field separation. Danny doesn't use any of this so to claim that he is doing what Harman, etc. are doing is just wrong. Go ahead and look at the response of any speakers he sells. You won't find measurements in bass. Where else have you found a company showing speaker measurements that are just gated and start at 200 Hz? If you are a hobbyist then it is one thing. But if you claim as Danny does that he is the best there is as a speaker designer but doesn't even know what Klippel NFS does (he thinks it is an averaging device), nor understand the importance of full frequency response, then this is a big issue. If he can't make full range measurements, then he should get an agency to do it. Not to justify that one doesn't need it and you backing him. It is like rating a TV but not include color red! His competitor, Ascend Acoustics saw a poor measurements that I performed on one of his speakers and instead of complaining like Danny does, went and bought a Klippel NFS and is now producing world class speakers. As to Harman, they have measured speakers with arrival of Dr. Toole with CEA-2034 style measurements. It is their protocol that got ratified as CEA-2034! So to say that they measured speakers before there was CEA-2034, makes no sense. Their spinorama was CEA-2034. As far as listening, I listen to every speaker and headphone I review. But it is not just some random listening tests producing nonsense subjective outcomes. I use the measurements to develop equalization that lets me test deviations in frequency response. This is a powerful tool to determine audibility of those impairments. For electronics, such frequency response deviations do not exist so expecting me to do sighted listening of them makes no sense. No way does Dr. Toole sanction sighted testing of electronics so I would not quote him on this front. Finally, Rick is super knowledgeable about speakers, their measurements and design. He is my expert DIY speaker builder and evaluator. He knows everything you said and then some. I suggest not throwing rocks at people before learning who they are and what they know. What he criticizes about Danny's work is identical to what I have said and per above, has substantial weight.

[@jeromeof]

I think its sad that you deleted Amir long and detailed response from here - Why not have a debate about it rather than censor ??

[@AudioUnleashed]

@@jeromeof we haven’t seen a response from Amir. I just checked the inbox and see no sign that he ever left a comment at all. And if he did, I assure you we’d never delete it unless he was trolling or spamming. Which absolutely doesn’t seem to be his style.

[@jeromeof]

@@AudioUnleashed Apologises - I think the problem was that Amir included a link back to the conversation on ASR and possible KZbin automatically remove comments with Links

[@AudioUnleashed]

@@jeromeof, well, that's a huge bummer. Needless to say, Amir or anyone else is more than welcome to tell us we're wrong in any way they want. We embrace any and all intellectually honest disagreement!

[@eddietours3728]

I think GR and Amir is entertaining 😅

[@Daniel_Ho_Status_101]

Audio has long been dominated by crazies who threw science under the bus and treated audio like a mystic cult you couldn't enter unless you recited their little red book of imaginary non-sense. So I got excited when I learned about ASR, a measurement focused audio website. Unfortunately, I've since learned that ASR is dominated by crazies who throw psychoacoustics under the bus and treat audio like a spreadsheet fantasy league you couldn't enter unless you recited their manifesto of minutiae beneath the threshold of audibility. Just buy Floyd Toole's book and be the outcast who enjoys good audio without the idolatry.

[@davemccallum8302]

ASR does not throw psychoacoustics under the bus nor does it treat audio like a spreadsheet. You embellish in slagging ASR and leave out all the good stuff that ASR does.

[@QuintEssential-sz2wn]

I’m a longtime ASR member, And I have some views the clash with some other ASR members. That said, Your characterization of ASR is ridiculous: It does not correspond with anything I have seen there. Or certainly not at least with the general tenor of the comments. I’m just amazed at how many of the criticisms of ASR are laced with mischaracterizations.