If you check ASR, you’ll see a lot of expensive components that measure poorly.
They even include the XLR to TRS adapter. Sweet.
My Opinion…
Cheap gear these days does measure very well for the investment.
You can certainly spend little, and have a very well engineered/well measured system which is amazing. But… In my experience great measurements don’t guarantee good sound.
My advice is always try hardware in your own system before making any comment.
Furthermore, one persons subjective experience may not be valid for another.
For instance, I have had a few DAC’s/streamers which received great reviews which I thought sounded horrible/average. Examples are: CXNv2, NAD M51, Node 2i, etc.
On the flip side I have had great measuring gear that sounded awesome, I.e. RME ADI 2 DAC fs, Pi2aes etc, and even poor measuring gear like the Nelson Pass First Watt F7 which sounds absolutely out of this world good!
So I think measurements can be a good indication of quality, but whether this translates to good sound is not a given.
Just remember the “Ear” is not a microphone. Hearing is a brain activity (the most complex organ in the body), so no doubt there are differences in how we all hear/translate electrical impulses from our ‘own’ ears. Combine this with subjective preferences, the mix is complicated further.
Refer to Fletcher Munson, Harman curve, etc. Which demonstrates the ear is not linearly sensitive.
1 Like
Yes, some common sense. 100%
I’ve been using a D10s since late January. I own several much more expensive DACs, but I needed one for a temporary work setup where I’m using a headphone amp that does not have a built in DAC. It is an excellent small inexpensive DAC. I highly recommend it. If the feature set meets your needs, I don’t think you can do better without spending a lot more.
3 Likes
Interesting. I looked these up on ASR and Archimago’s site. NAD M51 and Node 2i are measured and categorized as “can’t recommend” on ASR. Nothing from Archimago on any of the three. And of course reviews are not measurements, which is kind of the point those two are trying to make.
1 Like
You can use SOX (it is free) to upsample and try various filtering techniques from linear phase sharp brick wall type filters to minimum phase, very slow roll off, highly aliasing filters… There is quite a range to be tried on the various types of DACs, some with good results and others not so much… Dig around on Archimago’s site for some examples…
No reviews are not measurements.
I think we are on the same page, approaching from different angles.
A classic example of where measurements may not be all that helpful is speaker measurements.
Sure the measurements help define whether a speaker exhibits good power handling, dispersion both vertically and horizontally, a flat frequency response etc… but this tells you little about how that speaker will sound, its detail retrieval, or whether it has subjectively good sound quality.
Flat frequency response speaker A vs flat frequency response speaker B, may sound tonally very very different. Measurements cannot capture power response (The Hedd interview is a good example of this), or tonality? https://hedd.audio/klaus-heinz-how-to-find-the-better-studio-monitor/
So as measurements are limited in the information they can provide, I like to listen for myself.
I find ASR measurements helpful, they certainly help define whether the piece of hardware is a hot mess or not. I personally find GoldenSound’s approach better. Subjectivity + measurements.
At the end of the day, what sounds good is very subjective.
You must listen, but measurements may put you on a clearer path.
2 Likes
Yes, speakers are sheer voodoo, because they have to couple to individual and usually unique rooms.
Speakers should be calibrated to the room you’re using them in, and since most probably that is easiest if you start with a flat response, speaker measurements are still helpful. In theory, if you had your room BRIR and the speaker’s response, and they didn’t have rear ports, you could do that without any further measurements.
Funny that subjectivists often think £20,000 sounds better than £100 though isn’t it?
Also if it’s subjective how does anyone design audio components? Just build a million designs and listen to them? Of course not. They construct based on science and then measure them. That is, if they are good rather than just selling rubbish like PS Audio and putting it in a fancy case.
Well I guess that just alienated a load of people who happen to like PS audio.
I still prefer my poor measuring AudioQuest Black that cost £80 to my state of the art ASR measured SMSL SU9 at 3 to 4 times the price. I recently revived it after not using it and it’s a way more engaging listen in the same rig. On paper the SMSL SU9 should be as good as my RME DAC it just isn’t. I read ASR but I only use it as one part of the puzzle to solve. Price doesnt automatically make things better nor do amazing measurements. We all have different hearing and all prefer different presentations. If you can get the level of performance and enjoyment from a Topping great if not try something else until you do.
1 Like
Amir @ AudioScienceReview also tanked the AQ cobalt, both technically as well as sonically. I’ve bought it before, but will replace it with something cheaper and better.
Funny? You find truth funny? Interesting……
If you spend any time at ASR, I think you will conclude that there are many manufacturers for whom measurements are simply not part of their development process. Fortunately there are some manufacturers (notably Schiit) who, when confronted by the fact that their products measure badly, take that lesson to heart and improve their processes (and, thereby, greatly improve their products).
1 Like