Yeh look at what KEF produce for new speakers. Some people made comment negatively that JA at Stereophile used LS50s. KEF are serious about engineering and like to show it…
1 Like
looks like I should listen to these puppies
1 Like
If you were completely happy with your system and then read some review that indicated that the measurements were not as advertised in the specs, would that change your opinion of the sound of your system?
1 Like
Yes, it would. I would want to confirm my system is not faulty because it could be that much better. I don’t kid myself that I’m in this hobby and ever be “completely happy” with my system.
That and I don’t support manufacturers that are intentionally misleading or are outright deceitful as a matter of principle.
1 Like
Re Ron’s question
Not necessarily but would see if I could hear it’s impact
Feasibly it could be a positive one in a particular speaker, eg lessening excess brightness or bass boom
I agree with falling_leaves
That’s a shame.
2 Likes
This reminds me of the old joke about the guy who resets his watch whenever he sees a clock that disagrees with it.
4 Likes
To some maybe, to me it’s just good fun. I don’t think I’m alone in having this sentiment according to the result of the survey.
Don’t be silly… that’s just crazy… I’m still going to what I like and let that guide my journey. I just like it to be informed, in this case by both measurements and listening, no one is discounting the listening part here… like I said before, to keep manufacturers honest, you seems to conveniently ignore that point.
As an aside, we don’t do that anymore, but our smart phones are constantly resetting it clock to the reference one when there’s disagreement.
Second aside, I’m always happy with my system, just not completely happy. So to that end, I’m always happy 
3 Likes
That’s backwards. The specs set the design and product BOM.
Any tests or measurements required, requested or taken just verify if the (design) specs including tolerances were met.
2 Likes
You may have design performance targets…
But if you need to provide evidence for product specifications, you provide measurements …
Anyway the bigger picture is that they go hand in hand…
2 Likes
Agreed.
We build lot and lots of test fixtures to prove out design specs for automotive widgets. The OEM’s supply a spec performance range and the supplier tries to meet the spec and still make some money. It’s not always possible as you can imagine.
The fun part is when the supplier product meets the design spec perfectly but gets rejected due to the ride qualities that dont “feel right”. Not very objective but still part of the process.
So measurements are part of the proof that the specs are met but if humans are involved there is always the “look and feel” that is a non specific thing.
Kind of like two different people listening to the same stereo with one liking it and one not. The one spending the money get to say whether the bits stay or go regardless of any measurements.
3 Likes
This reminds me of my first call (I started as a tech engineer) to a pharma company that made vitamin C back when they had control of that market. I was called in by their maintenance group regarding their validating process (measurements) of the device that we sold them to measure fluid density. Our device gave a NIST-traceable accuracy spec of 0.001 gm/cc on liquids.
“Your meter is way off” they told me over the phone. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that their “reference” was a car battery hydrometer.
4 Likes
all of our tools are influenced by inaccuracies: mechanical, biological, price rationalization, psychological, emotional (eg, exemplified by brand-loyal consumers believe without doubt that their brand is best)
the audiophile world puts all of these tools and tendencies on display
this is where the fun is
I wish people would stop proclaiming their favorite thing or performer or … as “best”. “Favorite” is much more thoughtful than “best”, in my opinion.
7 Likes
This is a very different context of “specification” where you have a client and supplier relationship… now i see why you said it was backwards
The client specifies to the client what they want.
You can’t generalise that context to everything though
In our context here, I doubt Paul has asked Ted to achieve x% noise and distortion figures with the DirectStream DAC Mk2 …
so those figures you see on the specs page of the DAC would be what PS Audio measures with the production unit… since PS Audio own a newer Audio Precision Analyzer (to measure) and Ted does not…
1 Like
Or insert “love” for “best”. No such thing, what I enjoy is in the moment, no favorites, bests or non-animate objects are loved for that matter. Remember it’s all an illusion.
3 Likes
Only when measurements correlate with or help to explain why one item is perceived to sound “better” than another (looking at you, Galen, and also Nelson Pass for his insights on 2nd vs 3rd order harmonic distortion).
1 Like
Pass and D’agostino are 2 of the top tier that use the measurement as a reference only (to make sure there are no gross errors in the design) and place the sound first.
I’m sure many at the top of the heap are the same.
Performance first, final test data afterwards.
As already mentioned music playback is so personal that “best” simply can’t apply.
3 Likes
Does anybody really think measurements define perfection in anything?
3 Likes
Not really. But as I stated before it’s a good beginning point. Ultimately our ears and budget must make the final decision …
3 Likes