Audio Science Review Review

It's important to note that SBAF is not about super expensive, ORFAS gear. Yeah, a couple of not-exactly-cheap pieces have gone through loaners (some of which is coming up as of this post) and we've also praised some gear that's very expensive (Utopia, SR1a, etc); however SBAF has always been more about the odds and ends that are cheap that sound good. In the end, what we're really about is good sound. And yes, we have a definition for what constitutes good sound (if you are reading this and don't know what it is, you either never read what SBAF is about or haven't lurked enough, possibly both).

Just look at our advice threads. Most of the time, we recommend the cheapest possible good-sounding solutions. It's filled with "oh buy a Schiit XYZ, or something @Zampotech made." We have this reputation of being HD650 whores; we kind of are since you can get essentially get cheap ones from Drop. Unless budget allows, we never recommend some schmuck go out and buy a DNA, an EC, or Rockna; heck I try to stop people from buying that stuff unless they really know what direction they're going/have auditioned in it.

Want to get us really excited? Do what @Zampotech did with the SW51, which is a relatively cheap tube amp that legitimately makes all other amps from about $500 - $2000 obsolete. Or what @schiit did with the Bifrost 2, bringing us near-Gungnir MB levels of performance for a bit more than half the price. In comparison, the Rockna Wavedream, which @purr1n very positively reviewed, didn't receive much reaction other than "oh cool, a $$$$$ DAC that actually is better than a Yggdrasil." You could argue (and I'd agree with you) that the SR1a received tons of attention. However, I'd also like to point out the SR1a is exciting because it's actually something very new and worth getting excited over; ribbon drivers, semi-open baffle.

There is a reason why, despite the fact that many SBAF members like ZMF, still hesitate to run out and outright recommend them. One of the big reasons is price; it's a lot to risk for a headphone from a brand where you've never auditioned a product from.

It's funny because I've seen some people accuse SBAF of playing favorites. To be blunt, we do; we tend to like MOTs who engage with the community, care about their customers, and are just generally pleasant humans*.

*believe it or not this point makes it so much easier to like someone. People should try it out more often.

However, it doesn't matter whether or not we like that MOT; their gear is still held to the same standards. There is a reason why we like using comparative reviews; it helps everyone if gear is talked about in the context of other gear that is more well-known. Without comparison, reviews quickly become useless. And we've poo-poo'd gear we didn't like much from MOTs too; just look at what @Hands had to say about the Magnius.

 

ASR is not pushing "low-cost, good measurements".

At the top of their charts currently is the Mola Mola Tambaqui ($6000), followed by the Matrix Audio X-SABRE PRO MQA ($2000). Those ASR chart toppers seem to fit your "Wow what a rip off, I would never be able to afford it and anyone who buys this is a moron" category.

Next is the Topping D90 ($700) as if to say that you get close to $6000 performance with Topping.

$700 is not pocket change either.

 

The key difference is that we don't pretend to not play favorites like ASR. ASR hides behind the mask of measurements while freely doling out their subjective nonsense! I see ASR as at least 40% subjective per my points above.

We don't pretend that subjective impressions on SBAF aren't flawed, but we try to control the variables with loaner programs and getting gear in the hands of folks who have been highly involved and consistent with their observations over time. It's not much different from pain medication testing, except with a smaller sample sizes and without a placebo group (since this last part would be difficult).

One thing I've noticed is that good or bad gear tends to rate consistently, e.g. if 80%+ of the impressions say something is good or bad, then it's probably good or bad. Mixed gear tends to goes likewise with a split. It may be interesting to go back and score gear according to subjective impressions using a simple 0-4 scoring system and assigning weights depending upon the reviewer.

As far as biases, I think those vendors who do engage with SBAF do get nicer treatment. Although I do realize now that @Hands flat out said the Pontus was a piece of shit. Oh well, I guess it doesn't happen all the time. I think what it comes down to is whether the manufacturer is in the long game and wants us to be sincere, or is just seeking a positive review - the latter we have no patience for. In a few instances, manufacturers have worked with individuals here to tune a product. Of course something like this is going to receive at least a fairly positive reception!

As far as Magnius, I mostly stayed out of it. One reason is because I hauled my ass up to the Schiitr to get one only be be disappointed because I was hoping for a Heresy+. The other thing is that Jason is a friend, so I didn't want to hurt his feelings. Finally, I knew the negative (mixed) impressions were going to come in. I tend not to directly crap on gear as much these days and would prefer to leave hints (the members who know me usually get it - although oftentimes I wished I got pushed harder by the readers to give a straight answer, but this never seems to happen). And BTW: the Magnius is the worse sounding amp IMO that Schiit has ever made. There I said it.

 

$100-$200 is one thing. Once we get to $500+ gear people will really start to using their ears. The excellent measurements will draw people to buy the gear, but no amount of excellent measurements will convince people that it sounds good for the price. Tons of Topping D70 and D90 on the used market now.

 

FYI, another one here pointing out commentary that is inconsistent from the measurements including a reassessment of the brand's physical UI after an accommodation was provided by the manufacturer. I forgot about this thread somehow:

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...the-lines-and-draw-your-own-conclusions.9316/
Will add as CASE 5: Free gear for glowing review and poopoo'ing the competition in the first post.

I'm telling you guys, ASR's shaking them down like Tony Soprano.

 

Exactly. He is pushing the Topping D90 because the approach is impling exactly what you just said. But as pointed out, $700 is not low cost gear.

Note he is arbitrarily making an example out of Auralic Vega (G2), which has good measurement performance, but maybe they didn't pay up.

 

Not necessarily.

He still has not updated the front page of the Modi 3 which to this date still shows incorrectly it's performance at -96 dB THD+N because he miss-meassured it.

I also bet many folks, given the chart position, will be more inclined to buy the $250 Topping D50 (-110 dB THD+N based on ASR @ 2 Vrms) than the $100 Schiit Modi 3 (-107 dB THD+N based on ASR @ 2 Vrms).

And most folks would miss the fact that Modi 3 actually hits -110 dB THD+N @ -5dBFS, and the D50 might or might not (see page 11):
https://www.schiit.com/public/upload/PDF/Schiit DAC APx555 Standard Test Suite_ Modi 3.pdf?force_isolation=true

Most folks will go and make a decision based on the ASR summary.

Also, I made a mistake. The Mola Mola with the two tumbs up is $11500. The high-end and similar performing Auralic Vega for about 50% the price of Mola Mola is $6600 and has two tumbs down, because though it is half the price, it is not -121 dB THD+N, but -116 dB THD+N. Note both the Mola Mola and the Auralic Vega reach -110 dB IMD at full scale, but Auralic Vega does so for 50% the price and stil gets the two tumbs down. How is this "objective" or pushing "low cost"?

Also note he pushed the Auralic Vega G2 1 dB hotter which when nearing 0 dBFS can tilt the scales "un-objectively" in favor of this or that product. Further note that the distortion sweeps have about +/-3 dB of noise which affords ample cherry picking to tilt the scales at ASRs fancy. There is no margin of error in the charts.

Giving two tumbs up or down in a highly opinionated tone, based on the above facts, is obviously misleading. And is BULLSHIT.

 

It's a trick.

• Phase 1: Lay basis of rip-off audiophile gear by borking measurements of $2500 item.
• Phase 2: Show $100 Topping item measuring with better ENOB ("Amir-bits" interpretation with wrong methodology - no bandpass on linearity plot as called out by Jude/AP) than various Audiophile brand items at $5000
• Phase 3: Introduce $300 Topping item with marginally better SINAD than $2500-$5000 that tops the Excel bar charts
• Phase 4: A few months later, introduce $500 Topping item with marginally better SINAD than before that tops the charts yet again!
• Phase 5: Another few months later, introduce $800 Topping item with marginally better SINAD than before that tops the charts yet again!

As HF used to say: sorry about your wallet!

 

If he did, the chart would look different.

He is certainly pushing Topping.

 

They just pushed Schiit to allocate resources to that market. From what I am aware, Schiit has done all they can in terms of high-SINAD low-cost products, and will be resuming their regularly scheduled programming now that they've proved that they can design high-SINAD low-cost stuff in their sleep. ASR and friends are patting themselves on the back for getting Schiit to buy an AP555 and making them design better measuring gear using chips. Good for them! Both.

 

Don't you guys love it when I sell something that I don't want, I'll actually admit that it sucks (if it sucks) and drive the price down even more!