Audio Science Review Review

CASE 2: Ignoring objective measurements when it's convenient or when there is a business relationship

You mean these two speakers?

 

The below plot is the aforementioned JBL 305P (mk2).
The above graph is the SVS Ultra Bookshelves with the following commentary:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/svs-ultra-bookshelf-speaker-review.15055/

Subjective Listening Tests
My instant reaction to the sound of SVS Ultra was that it sounded "warm." The upper bass frequencies that exaggerated give an immediate pleasant impression. Alas, that quickly went away and while I could hear the appeal of it, it caused everything I played to have the same characteristic which was not right. At the same time, female vocals had very sharp extensions that were almost painful to listen to. This would come and go of course as the singing went along.

I played with EQ but after a while I gave up. Strangely no matter what I did, I could not get rid of the brightness in vocals. I did bring down the upper bass and lower mid-range level and that mostly helped but then it exaggerated the highs.

On positive front, the SVS Ultra can play really loud with good bass capability. I could get it to start to bottom out but that was at every high playback levels.

Conclusions
Having looked at the measurements first before listening, I thought they would either sound good "out of the box" or do so with just a bit of EQ. That did not happen. Try as I did, I could not like the sound with or without EQ. Yes, I could see the appeal of boosted upper bass in giving "warmth" to the speaker. But too much of that was well, too much of a good thing. I am puzzled where the sharpness was coming from seeing how I could not tame it. Perhaps directivity error was causing this.

I can't recommend a speaker that doesn't sound good to me and that is where I stand with SVS Ultra. I suspect measurement score will be good, making me look bad. So be it! ​

This of course raises a number of issues:

1. Why did "science" all of a sudden get thrown out the window?
2. Why was the SVS Ultra described as warm sounding when the JBL measured with marginally more warmth in the upper bass (125-200Hz)?
3. Why was the lower mid suckout and uneven jaggy response not noticed on the 305? The JBL was described as "smooth". In my experience, a jaggy response in the highs rarely translates in smooth, at least relative to a measured response that is actually smoother.
4. Was the cause of the "sharpness" a matter of transient response (currently no good measurement methods) and personal preference? Is ASR admitting there may be other factors behind this which current measurements do not address. And if this is so, then why the SINAD purity tests for amplifiers and SINAD?
5. Finally, did the JBL 305, despite uneven FR, a lower mid dip, get a fantastic subjective review because ASR / Madronal Digital is in bed with JBL? Read here: https://www.jblsynthesis.com/about/acoustics.html

*Note that the SVS Ultra Bookshelves use an aluminum tweeter, which have a different sound than the soft domes used by JBL.

 

CASE 3: Flawed listening tests / impressions not supported by measurements at the transducer or deeper analysis of amp measurements

@dmckean44 mentioned a few posts ago about not taking the whole into consideration back a few posts ago. I then replied that in effect, most of the distortion at the ear will be from the transducer.

Let's examine this statement at ASR in regards to the Jotuheim's output and then using the HD650.

​

We get good bit of reduction of noise there. Power output increases some because I am able to push the amplifier section harder than internal DAC. But then again it gets distorted so no sense in doing that. Also, once the amp distorts, it doesn't matter if you use the DAC or not. They both meet at the same place/point as you see in the graphs.​

I did not bother with my usual level matched blind AB tests. Instead I just played some music and turned up the volume to detect distortion. WIth Sennheiser HD-650 there was fair bit of power but once you went past the 2:00 o'clock position on the volume control, you could easily hear the distortion setting in. Similar situation existed with Hifiman HE-400i. Neither could pass my test of loudness without distortion which admittedly means pretty high SPLs (sound levels).​

When I read that last statement, I immediately called bullshit. That is bullshit that this distortion was specific to the Jotenheim. I repeated the same experiment myself, using the Modius as a source, using its RCA outputs be be consistent with the measurement above. I then cranked the volume knob on the Jot (low-gain) using the HD650 with balanced connector. Then I compared it to the zero dot zero zero zero zero distortion Magnius amp. I didn't hear any of this so called extra distortion from the Jot.

To be sure, I repeated this test with a 1kHz signal per above and measured the acoustic output from the headphone. The signal here is approximately 105-110db SPL - enough to destroy our hearing. Here are the results:





I'll let you guess which output came from the Magnius and which came from the Jot where "past the 2:00 o'clock position on the volume control, you could easily hear the distortion" because given the objective results above and my own subjective listening (with music from the headphones at a healthy distance), I sure as hell couldn't tell.

This brings up a number of concerns:

1. Why did ASR not conduct a blind comparative test on the subjective aspects?
2. Could ASR's conclusion of the distortion on the HD650 specific to the Jot been a result of confirmation bias based on a over-zealous reading of the amps distortion performance.
3. Could ASR bias against the manufacturer of the amp have caused laziness and lack of thoroughness, with too quick a judgement on subjective performance?

 

As a follow-up, in order to achieve the above SPL with the HD650 with the volume knob cranked to the 0300, the voltage required is this 2.628Vrms



Making some rough calculations, assuming a 300-ohm load, we are talking approximately 0.022W or 22mW of power. Lets look how the Jot performs per ASR's own power plot at 300-ohms. It happens to be in the sweet spot of Jotunheim's power curve!



So the mystery of this so called distortion from the Jotunheim with the HD650 after the volume knob is turned past 0200 is solved: it never existed. The distortion came from the headphone itself being driven at extremely high levels that would cause permanent hearing damage!

Note that the Jotunheim was actually one of the first zero dot zero zero zero amps in the first place! Years before anyone else. Though the Jotunheim does eventually get beat by the THX, Topping, SMSL, Geshelli, and Magnius later on, it does seem interesting that the Jotunheim never got credit for how well it actually performed. This is what I meant by "measurements for the sake of measurements" in the post first.

 

Don't get me wrong. Audio Science Review is a valuable resource!!! I do hit it from time to time to check up on stuff. I think people make way too much of the ASR vs SBAF thing!

The problem is when the objective approach gets taken too far as a litmus test. And then at times subjective interpretations from untrained ears, often based on severe bias to the point of ignoring good measurements - see the above post, are allowed to reign free.

Most consumers won't look at or want to understand the measurements. I know this full well from doing measurements with headphones for ten years now. They will look at the Pink Pather's pose, corresponding thumbs up or thumbs down, or what people like myself ultimately have to say. Measurement stuff is a lot more complex than that!

My desire is that if ASR wants to take a "science" and objective approach - then they should just stick to that. You can't grade gear by measurements one day, and then decide not to do so another day when it doesn't suite your personal biases, especially when you advertise yourself as the science and objective site.

 

Good. I relish personal and emotionally charged attacks against SBAF. (I am generally unaware of these things And really don’t have time to read about them, so I am assuming certain things: the same ol’ same ol’.)

In the meantime, please support continued SBAF endeavors against misinformation, flawed science, and hidden agendas by donating or signing up on Patreon: https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/donations-to-superbaf.331/

I’ll continue to make my points cleanly and without resorting to calling people names. You guys feel free to keep it a child-like fun with memes!

There was a saying on Chang or maybe SBAF early on: We don’t take ourselves seriously, but we take audio seriously. This goes with too objective for subjectivist and too subjective for objectivists; and of course, not too tight and not too loose.

 

It's not convincing the denizens on ASR that they are wrong. Their minds have already been made up. It's showing people who haven't decided or don't yet have a good understanding of measurements a more balanced and nuanced view.*

Again, I haven't read anything, but I surmise their arguments are based on pathos, appealing to emotions. I refuse to get trapped into that this time. My arguments are based on ethos (responsible use of measurements) and logos (logic). I would think that their reaction is a perfectly understandable one, not any different when religious extremists are presented with evidence and facts that blow away their beliefs.

I for one welcome the spillage of bile upon me. This is because I am confident of my position and could care less if ten, one hundred, or one thousand people think I am a jealous goober.

*And it's been working. People are listening with their ears and realizing that there is good sound quality to be found other than this 0.000x stuff, e.g. Topping, SMSL, THX, Magnius/Heresy, etc. The era of these extreme high SINAD chip amps is about to be over. They did well for a while, but the fad is over. Just look at Amazon stock and Drop sales (lack thereof). I'm just hammering the nails in the coffin.