Floor Loudspeaker Reviews

Q Acoustics 5040 loudspeaker

John Atkinson  |  Dec 29, 2023

When I reviewed the Concept 50 loudspeaker from the UK's Q Acoustics in August 2022, I concluded that the Concept 50 lowers the sweet price spot for affordable tower speakers to $3000/pair. Now I have another pair of Q Acoustics loudspeakers in the house for review. Like the earlier speaker, the 5040 is a slim, elegant-looking tower with a vertical D'Appolito drive-unit array comprising a 0.9" fabric-dome tweeter positioned between the two 5" plastic-cone woofers. But the price is half that of the Concept 50: $1499/pair. Will this be a new sweet spot? We shall see.

The 5040
Superficially, the 5040 appears identical to the Concept 50, with twin height-adjustable spikes at the front and stabilizing aluminum outriggers at the rear. But it is slightly shorter and lacks the earlier speaker's sprung base. The three drive units are mounted at the top of the High-Density Fiberboard baffle on a panel finished in black acrylic and isolated from the enclosure with a layer of butyl rubber. The enclosure is made from 18mm MDF and, as with the Concept 50, Q Acoustics has paid a lot of attention to the cabinet's vibrational behavior. Strategically placed Point-2-Point (P2P) internal bracing stiffens the cabinet to minimize low-frequency vibrations, while two tubes, called Helmholtz Pressure Equalisers (HPE), are said to reduce the effects of internal standing waves.

The proprietary drive units were developed for Q Acoustics's 5000-series models. The woofers' plastic cones are terminated with a substantial half-roll surround and feature what Q Acoustics calls a "Continuous Curve Cone" profile (footnote 1), which doesn't have a conventional dust cap. This cone was developed using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and is said to combine the bass-performance benefits of a traditional straight conical cone with the midrange frequency control of a flared cone while reducing harmonic distortion. The dispersion and what is described as "a well-controlled frequency response" should enable a smooth integration with the tweeter. The woofer's motor uses a substantial magnet with a near fully saturated pole piece and an aluminum ring mounted underneath the pole plate to reduce inductance-induced modulation distortion. The 30.5mm voice-coil is wound from low-mass copper-clad aluminum wire (CCAW) over a glass fiber former.

The woofers are reflex-loaded with a port 11" from the floor on the speaker's rear and cross over to the tweeter at 2.5kHz. This unit was developed from the Concept series tweeter. It is hermetically sealed to prevent modulation by internal pressure variations and mechanically isolated from the front baffle. The cloth diaphragm has a narrow concave roll surround and is loaded with a shallow waveguide.

Setting up
I used my Roon Nucleus+ to feed audio data over my network to an MBL N31 CD player/DAC, which was connected first to the Musical Fidelity Nu-Vista 800.2 integrated amplifier I reviewed in the December 2023 issue, then, later, to the Audio Research I/50 integrated amplifier I reviewed in September 2023. Finally, I hooked it up to my NAD M10 integrated amplifier. The Q Acoustics 5040 has a single pair of binding posts at the bottom of the rear panel. I single-wired each speaker with AudioQuest Robin Hood cable.

With the 5040s sitting on their spikes and outriggers—protective spike covers are provided for those who have wooden floors—the tweeters were 30" from the floor, which is a few inches below my ear height. However, a D'Appolito driver array optimizes the vertical dispersion so that the tweeter-axis response is maintained a few degrees above and below that axis while floor and ceiling reflections are reduced in level. Listening to the dual-mono pink noise track on my Editor's Choice CD (Stereophile STPH016-2; no longer available), I didn't hear any significant change in tonal balance if I slouched or sat up straight. The sound started to sound a little hollow if I rose to the point where I could see the top of the enclosure.

The manual recommends that the 5040s be positioned at least 0.2m (8") from the wall behind them, 0.5m (19.7") from the sidewalls, and 2–4m (78.7"–157") apart. As with the Concept 50s, the 5040s needed to be closer to the wall behind them than was possible in my room. (This is due to a short flight of stairs behind the right-hand speaker that runs up to the vestibule.) I therefore experimented with the speaker positions to give the most even midbass and upper-bass balance. The 5040's front baffles ended up 72" from the wall behind the speakers, which were 103" apart and 47" from the nearest sidewalls, though this distance was reduced at places by bookcases and record cabinets.

The manual also says that "turning the loudspeakers slightly inwards will sharpen the stereo image at the expense of a narrower sound stage." As I am a stereo imaging fanatic (footnote 2), I toed each speaker in to the listening position. I left off the vestigial grilles for my auditioning.

Listening
With their ports open, the 5040s reproduced the 1/3-octave warble tones on the Editor's Choice CD cleanly down to the 40Hz band, with the 50Hz warble a little lower in level. The 32Hz tone was reinforced by the lowest room mode, but the 25Hz and 20Hz tones were inaudible. The warble tones sounded very clean, with no "doubling" (adding second-harmonic distortion). The half-step–spaced tonebursts on Editor's Choice spoke cleanly down to 60Hz, with those lower in frequency suppressed a little and those between 2kHz and 4kHz slightly accentuated. Listening to the enclosure's walls with a stethoscope while the tonebursts played, I could hear a narrow band of liveliness between 250Hz and 300Hz on the rear panel. The side panels and front baffle were better behaved in this regard.

Though the 5040s were positioned farther out in my room than Q Acoustics recommends, the low frequencies had sufficient bass weight. The softly struck bass drum that punctuates Peter Gabriel's "My Body Is a Cage," from Scratch My Back (Special Edition) (24/48 MQA, Real World Productions/Tidal), was delivered into the room in what sounded to be full measure.

Footnote 1: A white paper on the technology featured in Q Acoustics' 5000-series loudspeakers can be downloaded from tinyurl.com/3c4m9du8.

Footnote 2: See my 1981 article on stereo imaging here.

NEXT: Page 2 »
COMPANY INFO
Q Acoustics
Unit 2, Woodside
Bishop's Stortford CM23 5RG
England, UK
(855) 279-5070
www.qacoustics.com
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on December 30, 2023 - 9:53am

Appears to be dying a slow death. The forum is now gone or at least no longer available on the website. And the comments on the home page articles are becoming less and less. The only posters seem to be a small handful of the same guys. I'm not gloating about this. I've been reading stereophile for 40 years. I don't want it to go away. IMO the reason this is happening isn't because of any failing on the part of stereophile but rather because of the diminishing size of the audiophile fanbase. We're a small minority of guys who are still living in the past. Including me. I have three daughters and three son's in law and six grandchildren and five brothers and sisters and all of them think my interest in home audio is strange, silly and incomprehensible. And they're probably right. Like George Harrison sang "all things must pass".

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on December 30, 2023 - 6:43pm

... is certainly not insignificant. And those printed words will remain part of the record, even in PDF form.
But user/audience contributions in the Forum -- or Comments section, remember the vanished Inner Fidelity and AudioStream sites? -- are gone forever (Archive.org does not have complete records).
What can one say ... other than: John Atkinson knew how to run this place.
Maybe AI and ChatGPT can help the current manager?

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on December 31, 2023 - 5:20pm

Save your content, i.e, Comments.
No advice on whether anyone should or should not participate in the Comments section.
Given what happened to the Stereophile Forum, AudioStream and InnerFidelity, it may be a wise precaution to use the "Save As" (html) file if you're on PC. On a phone or tablet, you can save to a PDF and mail the file to yourself.

iListen's picture
Submitted by iListen on February 7, 2024 - 3:34pm

If you want to know why no one wants to post here. There are 50+ posts here and not one of them is about the speakers reviewed.
All I see is a bunch of grown a$$ men b*tching and thinking they are superior to everyone else while looking down their noses at the scrubs.

The 2nd problem is, most of the reviews are stuff that costs more than a car. You are never going to get people interested in Hi-end audio when they can rent the band to play live in the living room for less than the cost of the Pre Amp.

3. When people come here and all they see is people fighting with each other, who the hell wants to be part of that? I haven't posted in 10+ years and Stereophile will likely be dead and gone before I come back and post anything else. You people are the reason this site is dying.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on December 30, 2023 - 11:04am

Maybe it will in the future. I don't think mixing all the non stereo and surround sound stuff in with it helps it any in keeping it's identity.

As for this review, those coat hanger speaker stabilizers look like s**t to me.
Cheers George

beeswax's picture
Submitted by beeswax on December 30, 2023 - 12:21pm

Having the forum disappear is disturbing. I've seen it in the comments at least twice now and no one from Stereophile has commented about it unless I've missed it. I'd love a note for transparency's sake for the audience. Second, I wouldn't read too much into the lack of comments at the moment. It's the holidays. But, yes, it's a lot of the same people. I've only recently begun to comment a little bit, and there has to be other silent readers like myself out there. Happy New Year and here's to hoping Stereophile has many more years ahead. Long live Herb and Co.!

MCK22's picture
Submitted by MCK22 on January 1, 2024 - 6:26pm

One reason I have stopped commenting is that the same few people seem to be obsessed with posting negative and pessimistic messages. I don't want to add credibility to the trolls.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on December 30, 2023 - 12:27pm

is there any wonder why some of us are ignoring the comments section (and the comments sections everywhere - filled w anonymous rants by negative nuts.) And by the way old fellas, letters to the editor compared to readership is miniscule. No magazine or newspaper really pays attention to letters to the editor. Stereophile is doing just fine. But you are right, this is a niche hobby. Own that fact. But also own that guys like you NEVER have anything nice to say. All you want to do is contradict and second guess editorial decisions etc. Sorry but a Topping component is not going to make the cover.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 2, 2024 - 12:14pm

Is almost NO one actually talks about the product here!

Instead of learning something new, they'd rather look for validation of one's audio purchases or furthering their own biases.

Did anyone actually talk about these speakers or refer to the review in a audio/speaker-themed comment? Did they reference the review even once? That's typical for every month's edition and for almost every post.

And Stereophile keeps on truckin every month. Very glad they don't need negative posters for their survival.

beeswax's picture
Submitted by beeswax on December 30, 2023 - 12:47pm

OpEds and letters are still important to newspapers, but, even there, it's a lot of the same people writing in. Still, they're especially important for marginalized voices to find a path into conversations.
Johnny Thunder, of course it's a niche hobby, but there are so many companies your head could spin off, and the big shows seem to be really bustling. Sales figures are totally opaque, so who knows really who is selling what? Audio companies that haven't advertised or come out with new products in ages seem to float along like ghost ships, especially after driving forces die. Music Reference seems to be gone, but EAR continues. Who is buying? We've seen consolidation of brands under big umbrellas like MoFi (kind of like in the liquor/beer business), which is fine if there is integrity in the independence of the product (Imbev has ruined a lot of famous beer), but the concept of scale is elusive. It's no stock market with quarterly reports, that's for sure. Still, there are clues: Everyone knows you will wait two years for Decware while HiFi Rose you can buy at Crutchfield. I've also sensed that the diminished activity on Audiogon was a sign of withering, but how to really know? And, heck, does it even matter? Bring back the forums!

ChrisS's picture
Submitted by ChrisS on December 30, 2023 - 12:48pm

...duly noted.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on December 30, 2023 - 7:21pm

I think if JA did even more than twice as much in the test and measurements department, and only have one page of subjective reviewing, then the readers that do read/like and understand ASR's tests/measurements, maybe will also come here to read JA's tests.
And yet the mag should still maintain the few that follow/believe reviewers subjective thoughts that ASR don't have, they just have readers opinions which can be taken with a grain of salt.
Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on December 30, 2023 - 10:50pm

Don’t you already get enough ‘it all sounds the same’ gratification and sniffing about ‘snake oil!?

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 2, 2024 - 12:16pm

All seeking validation of their own biases and contempt.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on December 30, 2023 - 8:24pm

for our favorite resident ASR fanboy - "Oh blow it out your ass Howard."

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on December 30, 2023 - 9:27pm

And once again your foul mouthed aim is personal instead of being on the subject discussed.
There's nothing wrong with ASR's measuring/testing techniques, it "seems" only to get "paid out on" by those who have no idea how to read them.
As I said it would be nice if JA had another page to really give us more of the same amount of it as ASR has.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on December 30, 2023 - 10:52pm

I don’t think anyone there actually listens to music.

Best if both places follow their preferred muse.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on December 31, 2023 - 11:34am

1-read a good review of something
2-be skeptical of that review
3-look at the measurements and find fault with said measurements or complain that no measurements were done on said subjective review
4-make no mention of music. or the emotional component of music that is conveyed by the recording process and the reproduction of music in comments
5-incessantly bring up an obscure website celebrated by people of like mind to gloat over how subjective findings are nonsense (oh those suckers!)
6-demonstrate an astounding lack of self awareness manifested in an inability to "read the room" and not post where their opinions are derided because of their overall nasty and negative demeanor.
7-demonstrate a Taliban-like inability to allow others to enjoy what they are reading on this site.
8-can never offer anything positive. just criticism.
9-I can think of some more. feel free to add to the list...

MatthewT's picture
Submitted by MatthewT on December 31, 2023 - 3:04pm

Masturbating to SINAD numbers and bleating along with the rest of the sheep. Actually listening to music is way down the priority list.

dan3952's picture
Submitted by dan3952 on January 3, 2024 - 5:28pm

I agree. The ASR SINAD measurements are probably taken and talked about too much. The equipment might be connected to another, totally different kind of machine in the back room of the lab. :) Check out the Axiom study about audibility of THD in the real world, available to all, done by industry veteran Alan Lofft. Rejecting a particular DAC because it has a "Sabre IMD spike" at a certain frequency, ending up at 70 below source, when audibility is at 35 below source at that frequency, is pretty silly, to me. Furthermore, audibility by humans of sudden distortion spikes, tends to be less audible than continued trends. I had experienced this first hand when I had done room correction with readily available REW software. The observed THD there, was far higher than what had been measured at ASR with any DAC or amp.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 1, 2024 - 6:07am

to pay the bills and support the work of all the subjective reviewers which is what 99% of us want to read and enjoy. We don't want technical charts, we want to read what a reviewer - a music lover w a point of view and not an audio engineer - has to say about the equipment. That's where we differ and that's why you and others should seek your measurement kicks elsewhere.

dan3952's picture
Submitted by dan3952 on January 3, 2024 - 5:26pm

There is indeed nothing wrong with ASR's measuring and techniques, based on what I have read. I do know how to read them. But, the idea that DACs that have the highest SINAD score, must offer the best sound quality, is false. Amir's SINAD bar graph has little applicability to real world music which has distortion and harmonics and isn't a sine wave. Neither THD nor SNR measurements are reasons in most cases to choose one component over another. What is the point in debating these things, when THD has to be 3% at 1.8 kHz, for it it to be detectable by the average person? What does DAC SINAD amount to compared to what your speakers and room are doing to the signal? My R2R DAC measures far worse than the delta-sigma one on Amir's chart but I prefer the R2R one over any DAC I've had, because I feel it's more musical and offers a deeper soundstage. I feel that I am hearing something that can't be measured. Vinyl and tube amp aficionados probably buy equipment that graphs poorly all the time, but it sounds more natural to them, and it's less about analyzing the recording or that new gadget.

David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on December 31, 2023 - 7:22pm

Amirm reviewed the Magnepan LRS speaker and concluded it is one of the worst speakers he has ever tested in terms of measurments. I own them and they are the best sounding speakers I've ever heard. So there is that.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 1, 2024 - 12:30pm

Not that listening is a valid thing to undertake.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 1, 2024 - 1:26am

Amirm does back up his bad measurement results with coinciding subjective listening conclusions at the end of the post. http://tinyurl.com/ymxus2q5

Stereophile: Herb [Reichert]:
"KEF LS50 and the Magnepan LRS were showing me two distinctly different views."
"The punchy, deep-voiced KEF was playing fit, well-drawn, mesomorphic rock."
"The LRS version was more ectomorphic. More detached. Instead of head-bopping and foot-stomping (like the LS50)"

Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 1, 2024 - 12:34pm

Amazing how that works.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 2, 2024 - 12:20pm

No way no how. It takes months to understand any planar and how to properly set it up in a room. Personal blood sweat and tears. Nothing else, other than an experienced Maggie owner, will improve upon that learning curve.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 1, 2024 - 6:58pm

Yeah it sort of lines up with what Amirm heard and measured.
And also with what Herb heard and JA measured.

Go figure? how can measurements v listening be aligned to one another say the "avid measurement deniers'.

Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 2, 2024 - 8:25am

Nobody is denying measurements, people are saying be sure to listen so you can see what you hear for yourself rather than having your guru fiddle with it for 15 minutes and bestow upon you your brand new opinion.

ASR Opinion: "I tested one speaker on my test rig and then after I measured, I used by newly acquired test knowledge to judge that speaker's sound." If you'd like to complain about being objective, have him listen beforehand, at least. No mention of how he set up a given pair of speakers for a session in a proper listening trial. Just an open sighter regurgitation of his own expectations, and you guys call that 'audio science?'

The vast majority of us like measuring and listening. You should try it!

Have you ever listened to any Magnepan? Your opinion would mean more than the official ASR opinion.

I would assume being an audiophile and having at least a modicum of intellectual curiosity would mean that you have tried to listen around.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 2, 2024 - 11:32am

You must be blind then, ASR has one of the most comprehensive set of measurements there are, only bettered by Miller Audio Research
http://www.milleraudioresearch.com/avtech/index.html
Those ones will seriously **** with the brains of those here that are measurement deniers and can't even decipher theses ones that JA or Amirm put up.

Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 2, 2024 - 11:46am

It's not denying measurements. That's you making up a term to apply to people outside your cult to make you feels better about yourself.

We can play that fallacy: you music deniers can go listen to an oscilloscope.

You're just being dumb, george.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 2, 2024 - 12:25pm

We take issue with the fundamental core assumption that only measurements are directly correlated with listening AND that measurements tell us all about a given product, as ASR assumes with every single 'review' or post.

That is a fallacy they fail to admit as an ENTITY. Like MAGA, it is all in the cult of personality with Amir (or Donny).

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 2, 2024 - 12:32pm

well stated Mr. Glotz. That sums it up. But that's why creativity as a skill is so derided. It can't be measured.

dan3952's picture
Submitted by dan3952 on January 3, 2024 - 5:53pm

And ASR offers one of the most meaningless sets of measurements ever published. I'd say that to Amir's face at an audio show, and offer three or more references to him proving it. What is the point of claiming a piece of equipment is superior due to it having a SINAD value in the green zone over the orange or red one? He's obsessed with this. What is the point of debating small differences in SNR or THD in a DAC instead of the much larger differences between speakers?

Laphr's picture
Submitted by Laphr on January 7, 2024 - 11:07am

The drone of 'interpret the measurements' never made much sense to me. How does any measurement translate into sound? It seems to me the subjectivity over there is in using measured data to assert a sound that nobody's heard. Weird.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 2, 2024 - 12:39pm

to a friend of mine who is looking for reasonably-priced floorstanders. If JA liked them that much, they get my mouth time.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 2, 2024 - 1:42pm

Any that haven't needs to go straight into the garbage.

When good equipment is manufactured it's designed using measuring and test equipment, and then listen to. And if need be re-designed and re-tested till you get what you need.(never re-configured without re-testing/measuring)
If there's a parameter of testing/measuring "that you know is not great" then it "can" in many times be picked out with the listening.
EG: an amps output impedance (damping factor) if not low enough can be noticed into speakers that have a low impedance in the bass as not quite tight enough or slightly thickened sound, (and btw no amount of million dollar speaker cable will fix that)

Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 2, 2024 - 4:04pm

You described it quite well: measure, then listen.

You ASR guys stop with 'measuring" and then assume the listening part. You're anti-listening?

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 2, 2024 - 7:25pm

Amirm rarely does "subjective reviewing" of what he reviews, just objective "very accurate" measurements/test, and that's all that's of interest on that site.
He leaves it up to you "if" you can decipher them, and then go out shopping and audition the ones you like the objective measurements of. That way you don't get caught out, with a crap purchase that won't hold it's value, because it's published to have crap measurements.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 8:30am

He posts listening comments, they are at the bottom of his reviews....he listens to the gear only after the measurements are done so he can 'confirm' the validity of his tests under open sighted
(monophonic?) conditions.

Is that science? Or even "Audio Science?"

No. (I'll let you try to guess the name of the term. (Hint, it starts with "confirmation" and ends with "bias.") Or, is your guru immune?

Have him try the same thing before he has the measurements to build his impressions around. That shouldn't be asking too much.

Are you one of those unblinking acolytes?

At what SINAD number do you quit caring?

Keep marching according to his orders, buddy, and let other people enjoy the hobby as they desire. Bet ya can't.

John Atkinson's picture
Submitted by John Atkinson on January 3, 2024 - 8:44am
Anton wrote:
[Amir at ASR] posts listening comments, they are at the bottom of his reviews...he listens to the gear only after the measurements are done so he can 'confirm' the validity of his tests under open sighted (monophonic?) conditions.

Is that science? Or even "Audio Science?"

No. (I'll let you try to guess the name of the term. (Hint, it starts with "confirmation" and ends with "bias.")

Exactly the case, Anton. For this reason Stereophile's reviewers never see the measurements until after they have submitted their review texts to the editor. I take my hat off to them for having the courage of their convictions.

BTW, even though I do all the measurements for the magazine, for my own reviews I almost never measure a product until after I have finished my critical listening.

Happy New Year - John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

teched58's picture
Submitted by teched58 on January 3, 2024 - 10:05am

I must ask: The logical extension of JA1's and Anton's comments above is: Why do we do measurements at all?

You both have said that measurements don't determine whether you think something sounds good. You've also criticized Amir's process of doing measurements first and listening second. However, I notice that you don't actually criticize Amir for doing the measurements. You just don't seem to like the way he uses them (i.e., he relies on them too much).

Anyway, so respectfully, back to my question. If measurements don't provide any actionable info -- i.e., if they're just interesting, but don't change any outcomes -- why bother?

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 10:18am

It's not one or the other, to the death.

Imagine designing any audio product without using objective measurements.

Measurements can give us fair warning about gear, as well. Plenty of use for measurements.

Measurement absolutely has a place at the table...maybe first chair. But saying that listening has no valid place in this hobby is just flat out crazy.

I only say that some measurements are not the be all end all aspect of enjoying gear.

People on both sides arue this like your crazy drunken relatives at a family gathering...inappropriately summing up all positions as needing to be placed at an easily assailable extreme on one side or the other. That's BS.

The answer involves both!

Cheers.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 3, 2024 - 4:55pm

Serve as a check on the reviewer. If I review a headphone amp and say it's literally the best thing since sliced bread and makes my Pass Labs HPA-1 (my reference) sound like a pile of panther crap, you'll probably want to see some measurements to back that up. What I want to see a measurement for, is why do headphone amps sound better AND have more detail being fed through the tape loop of my Pass XP-22 pre-amp than directly. This is both consistent and befuddling. Even with the HPA-1.

Herb once reviewed a pair of standmount speakers supposedly aimed at the pro market, and he gave a very good review. I looked at the measurements, and they were, uh, interesting. I honestly don't know what Herb liked about them, but they had a couple fundamental flaws (including one very serious frequency anomaly). No professional would use them. I think... there's another mfg that makes terrible measuring speakers that are popular in the pro market so who knows? Their products have been reviewed here, btw.

Mark Phillips,
Contributor, Soundstage! Network

David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on January 2, 2024 - 8:15pm

Maybe what's going on is that there is no measurement or test for sound quality. I think Amirms measurements are probably accurate. They probably do measure as poorly as he says. It's just that that doesn't describe what they actually sound like. Maggies are fussy and have a few shortcomings in absolute terms. Frequency response, dispersion, very current-hungry, inefficient, and they just don't do "loud". But what they are good at they do better than any other speaker (that I've ever heard). I have three pair of regular speakers (dynamic drivers in a wooden box) and sometimes I swap out the maggies for them but when I do all I hear is a box. To me an analogy is that conventional speakers are like a lightbulb and Maggies are like an open window. But I'm probably biased. And there's nothing wrong with a lightbulb.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 10:36am

Of course, you'd get the master debaters at ASR revved up and they would hound you for that opinion.

MatthewT's picture
Submitted by MatthewT on January 3, 2024 - 1:40pm

An all gear sounds the same type? Sorry if I have you confused with someone else.

ChrisS's picture
Submitted by ChrisS on January 2, 2024 - 10:20pm

...no smell

Yet when we say "like a summer's day", we all know what that means.

Measure all you like, but when a speaker sounds good in my

system playing my music in my room to me...

...It's a summer's day.

(BTW, well said, David)

bhkat's picture
Submitted by bhkat on January 3, 2024 - 8:03am

It is always good to have a comprehensive set of measurements esp. of multi-kilo buck amplifiers. Speaking of cults, as the recent former president of Harvard wrote in her thesis: "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 3, 2024 - 10:38am

No one is saying that but you!!

"Amir's process of doing measurements first and listening second."
Amir doesn't do listening reviews nearly all are measurements only, he just recommends at the end if they are great or bad measurements

"I think Amirms measurements are probably accurate. It's just that that doesn't describe what they actually sound like."
That's because he sees that as a subjective description (personal)

"I notice (JA/Anton) that you don't actually criticize Amir for doing the measurements. You just don't seem to like the way he uses them (i.e., he relies on them too much)."
He's a measurer only, just like these guys
http://www.milleraudioresearch.com/avtech/index.html

Cheers George

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 11:32am

1) If the guy only measures and can't/won't comment on the sonics, which he actually does in rather spectacularly poor fashion, then don't make freaking recommendations for products that are designed to be listened to.

He even posts pics of little Pink Panthers to recommend products. If he makes recommendations about Hi Fi gear, which you know he does every time, and does no listening, then those are pretty vapid positions to take.

2) "I think Amirms measurements are probably accurate. It's just that that doesn't describe what they actually sound like."
That's because he sees that as a subjective description (personal)."

Then don't make freaking recommendations. His style is to try on one shoe and then draw conclusions about general performance.

Seriously, you know that place. He bestows blessings and his acolytes worship at his altar and attack subjective listening. And you call subjective reviewing crazy...the irony!

3) He claims to be an objectivist yet posts listening impressions based on open sighted apparently monophonic conditions and you guys give him ZERO negative feedback. I know a personality cult when I see one.

If a forum member posts a subjective listening impression, you lemmings leap off cliffs in order to point out the folly of sighted listening.

It's a duplicitous mess.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 3, 2024 - 11:48am

"If the guy only measures and can't/won't comment on the sonics, then don't make freaking recommendations for products"

Really stupid thing to say!! unless you can't read measurements.
These guys do the same
http://www.milleraudioresearch.com/avtech/index.html
And ASR does stand for "Audio Science Review" science being the operative word

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 12:30pm

Do you not notice?

"Audio" implies listening. Maybe not to you.

Audiophile also implies listening. Maybe not to those people or to you.

Look how long it took for Jim Hagerman to get bounced for posting about listening impressions. How long did it take for you to get kicked out of this place for being a measurements uber alles type. Oh, wait, you didn't.

Maybe if you add "Witness" to the end of ASR, you'd be getting closer to their truth.

I love the posts there where some dope with a Elac standmount says stuff like, "Wilsons? Can't even look at them, I would NEVER listen to those. My speakers crush Wilson (or Magnepan, or Klipsch, or anything unblessed by ASR.)"

"I only believe in objective measurements. Check out my Harley."

"All wines are indistinguishable."
Quite the herd.

___

Just because you call something Audio Science Review does not make it so.

Does calling a place "Truth Social" mean that the place is truthful, since "truth" is the operative word?

;-D

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 3, 2024 - 10:27pm

"Look how long it took for Jim Hagerman to get bounced for posting about listening impressions."

Why misrepresent what happened?

He wasn't "bounced." His thread was closed. You know, the thread where he posted testimonials about products he sells and wouldn't provide any further evidence for the claims. That's not about silencing listening impressions; that's silencing a poster using the forum to market his product.

teched58's picture
Submitted by teched58 on January 4, 2024 - 8:35am

Why do some of you gentlemen spent so much time dumping on Amir?

I notice ASR doesn't return the favor.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 4, 2024 - 9:33am

The reason we dump on them is he and his posters make statements based on confirmation bias and literally ruins the collective by way of misinformation and poor correlations.

Equipment that measures 'well' is successful and the ones that don't, aren't. Yet they don't actually review anything, but Amir DOES make statements of his approval or disapproval, implying good sound from good measurements. And yet almost no commentary on how it sounds and WHY from said measurements.

I consider that as dangerous as Fox News spewing lies about everything under the sun. Amir is directly misleading those shopping in the audio market. It has real implications. I liken it the slow brainwashing of every Republican extant.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 4, 2024 - 9:57am

You must not read anything there.

Your post was literally laugh out loud funny.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 5, 2024 - 1:34pm

Nobody mentioned anything until Genius George starting banging about the Gospel of ASR.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 10, 2024 - 4:33pm

For me specifically, this is true - I don't like wine and it all tastes like grape juice mixed with ethanol. A sommalier, on the other hand, can literally tell you when and where the grapes were grown with repeatable accuracy on a blind tasting. I can taste sweetness and dryness, that's it. It's like environmentalists who spout, "believe the science," yet are against vaccines because some quack told them some BS. I believe that most of the ASR folks have as much capacity for critical listening as I do for telling wines apart.

The weirdest thing to me about that site is that there actually are people on there that like poorly measuring equipment (like tube amps) because it sounds pleasant to them. I only see them in non-review threads though.

Mark Phillips

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 3, 2024 - 4:25pm

You can name your website anything you want, doesn't mean it's true. Amir doesn't do science, and honestly doesn't really know what he's doing. In the review you linked to he measured a Magnapan dipole speaker with a Klipple machine. Only someone who has zero understanding of how that speaker works would measure it nearfield and call it a day (he even measured it off the ground, so the bass dropped like a rock). He did NOT attempt an in-room measurement.

The bigger problem with his measurements is that he'll measure whatever crap people send him and make some authortative sounding comment based on a single sample of unknown provenance (VERY unscientific). Another user made Klipple measurements of a Genelec 1031A speaker and it was moved to the main review page... turns out (after Genelec got involved, with the original factory measurements) the speaker had been incorrectly repaired and the tweeter was wired out of phase (20 year old active speaker, JGH loved 'em in his review). Unknown provenance will get you every time.

Another fun example of why Amir should be ignored: he "tested" a pair of HiFiMan Susvara headphones (never heard 'em myself). He hooked them up to a Benchmark AAA amp and couldn't figure out why they wouldn't go louder than 114dB. Seriously? It's like he doesn't actually understand engineering (materials only stretch so far and the diaphram is like 0.0001mm thick). Also, who in their right mind would listen at 114dB continuous? He validates the comedic insults of Sheldon Cooper on the show The Big Bang Theory in regards to engineers.

I do trust the measurements made by Mr. Atkinson, Mr. Miller at HiFi News, and our own at SoundStage. All three publications follow the same model, listen then measure. The people doing the measuring know their stuff. I personally don't read reviews of anything I might also review, though I will after a review to see if my opinion matches others'.

Mark Phillips,
Contributor, SoundStage! Network
B.Sci. Biochemistry 2009
B.Sci. Radio-TV-Film 1991

PS - he also treats his *subjective* opinion about things he does listen to (mainly speakers) as if they were *objective*. Oh, and for a good giggle and some insight into Dunning-Krueger read his about me page, a quote:

"Without giving away my exact age, I grew up in 1960s with analog electronics as my primary hobby. Learned that from my oldest brother who likewise had the same hobby and spent his nights and days designing electronics. This gave me an intuition for analog electronics which to this day serves me better any textbook or formal education." So he's admitting his EE degree (and actual science) is essentially worthless to him. I assume this applies primarily when his education and opinion are at odds.

PPS - SINAD ranking is a worthless metric, no acoustic recording has a S/N ratio better than about 80dB. None. Ever. Microphones are the weakest link.

The threshold of pain is 120dB, a S/N greater than that is stupid unless you want to faithfully simulate a jet engine or 155mm howitzer.

Amir is a charlatan gettin' rich off suckers (donators).

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 5:32pm

Cheers, amigo!

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 3, 2024 - 6:52pm

I think Klipple test gear is sold out of the back of white vans.

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 3, 2024 - 6:54pm

nm

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 4, 2024 - 10:06am

I didn't run the copy past my editor. Did your comments make you feel superior? Is your everyday life so without meaning that your only joy comes from correcting people over the spelling of words that don't even originate in English? It's not like I used the wrong version of your or too, jeez.

I can see why Wally didn't want to hang out with you, you're exhausting.

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 4, 2024 - 12:29pm

So your response to a couple of simple corrections made without malice is to make personal attacks at the person correcting you. That says a lot about you, and not in a good way.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 4, 2024 - 1:26pm

and don't try to pretend otherwise. If they weren't, you'd have corrected everyone's spelling mistakes, not just mine. Calling you tiring isn't an insult, just a fact of my interactions with you. I suspect you've heard it many times before.

Gaslighting is pathetic, maybe you should rethink the life choices that brought you to this point where you thought gaslighting me was a good move.

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 4, 2024 - 2:05pm

I corrected something simple in another article just above this one. It's not personal, and it's not about you.

We all make mistakes. Lord knows I've made many. When I get corrected for some simple error I make online, my reaction is "Oops, that's embarrassing. Thanks for the correction."

Your reaction is quite different.

beave's picture
Submitted by beave on January 4, 2024 - 2:09pm

Come to think of it, over the years I've pointed out typos and small errors to a couple of authors here, including JA1. In each case their response was to thank me for the correction, not to lob personal attacks.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 5, 2024 - 9:51am

I don't write for Stereophile (I write for someone else, as noted above), and the typos were not in the article. I see you just can't quit the gaslighting, so we're done here.

Bye Felicia.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 4, 2024 - 9:36am

Charlatan indeed. Terrible the damage he causes daily.

MatthewT's picture
Submitted by MatthewT on January 3, 2024 - 12:27pm

With ASRtards is a total waste of time, right?

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 3, 2024 - 12:31pm

But the general vibe is sort of adolescent in its certitude.

MatthewT's picture
Submitted by MatthewT on January 3, 2024 - 1:38pm

And the intolerance of everything but the party line.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 3, 2024 - 4:27pm

Exactly.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 4, 2024 - 8:40am

comments here backed up with eloquent arguments about the absolute folly of that entire enterprise - the Scientology of audio thinking. Love poking holes in the flawed thinking of the great and powerful "Amir" - he of the pleated khakis, pocket protector and slide rule casting judgment down on gorgeously made Nagra, Dartzeel, Luxman,etc. components. "Amir" who with one wave of his hand can banish all 2nd harmonics from the land. "Amir" who with one post can instill fear in all purchasers of any amplifier that isn't class D and costs more than 1500.

David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on January 4, 2024 - 8:58am

IMO ASR does call out ,correctly, some things which are, in fact, nonsense. Such as speaker wires, power cords, power conditioners, etc. But I don't think measurements describe the actual sound quality of speakers. Only my opinion.A few years ago there was one B&W stand-mounted speaker (I don't remember which one) which I bought and brought home and hated. It was the worst sounding speakers I ever heard. Horribly harsh,bright,foreward,loud, and unlistenable. I took it back to BestBuy the next week.The audio websites, if I remember right, mostly praised it.Only ASR said it sounded like shit.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 4, 2024 - 9:46am

To say B&W speakers sound this way should cause you to ask why and find a reason why the rest of your system is causing 'hated' sound.

It is VERY easy to make Maggies sound harsh, bright and forward as well. Super easy. Most would find ANY B&W speaker to sound more balanced in FR than ANY Magneplanar speaker, largely because of mid and low bass response and a lack of setup know-how. While I can see where your complaint lies, you should be questioning your own biases and ignorance. (no offense)

Think about the external factors to that as well. "Wires" and conditioners do work... you just need to open your mind to their capabilities and their correct applications. And if multiple professionals tell you they work and Amir says it isn't... think again.

Keep in mind, Amir spent 2 or 3 sentences stating what he doesn't or does like. That is not enough, especially to claim something is 'shit'. B&W has been around for decades and if they were making shit they wouldn't be around anymore. Think long on that, dude.

David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on January 4, 2024 - 8:03pm

Amirm didn't actually say "shit". That was my word. My apologies.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 4, 2024 - 10:18pm

My point still stands. We all need to question ourselves and our learned and unconscious biases. I still visit the ASR site and read, but I don't have an account, nor do I need one.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 8:27pm

I haven't heard a B&W speaker in some time (801 matrix, series 2 when they were still a new thing long ago lol) but looking at measurements they do seem to have a house sound with the treble tipped up a bit *on axis*. I'm too lazy to look at the excellent off axis measurements that JA does to see how that falls off horizontally in various models. They seem like a lotta work to set them up kind of speaker, which is fine (my Dynaudio Heritage Specials are hot on axis but almost flat ~30 degrees off axis for example and are a fair bit of work to get dialed in just right).

Also, as a guy that likes to rock, Maggies don't really work for my personal use case (I'm a drummer) but that doesn't mean they're bad speakers. I wish people would just accept that measurements can't tell you what something will sound like since nobody's hearing/taste is exactly the same - it's ALL subjective, and that's what annoys the funk out of me re: hardcore objectivists. I hear things differently than you Glotz, and we both hear differently than Mr. Harper above. If that weren't the case, we would have like 99% fewer audio mfg's - just Harmon and their famous curve.

Just listen and buy what makes you happiest in your budget range is the best advice, and I suspect you agree. I wish people would figure out that you use audio magazines to discover new brands to listen to and explore, not tell you what to buy. Only your ears can tell you what to buy, as you well know Mr(?) Glotz.

and now I step down from my soap box lol.

Mark Phillips,
Contributor, Soundstage! Network

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 8, 2024 - 8:48pm

And I do feel pretty restricted as a Maggie owner.. they do not do drums well without stereo subs and even then their mid bass impact is utter garbage and the absolute achilles heel that speaker group (3.7i down).

While the 1.7i's are better in every regard over the 1.6, there is no helping what they lack in rocking out nor do they have deeply carved and fleshed-out out images, despite their nice localization. Getting pushed into the sweet spot is old hat for me now, but after hearing MBL's or any dynamic drivers, I yearn for more! KEF R11's please... Dynaudios are indeed very neutral, though some may say hot. Lol.. most are surprised that neutral is no Harmon curve!

I did hear the 800 and 700 series for B&W at length at AXPONA several instances and I definitely see where David is coming from... They very sometimes have a papery-dry quality sometimes depending on axis positioning and listening position. It reminds me of older ARC electronics and I do not like that FR signature one bit, though I have deep respect for both brands. I guess David's line was obvious to me in that he needs to look deeper at his own system and all of the chaotic variables that perhaps lead one to blanket judge a speaker brand, especially when one's preferred brand is very guilty of those same commissions. And Maggies do do some 10 areas of greatness that make up for the 3 or 4 they suck in. That's a personal trade-off equation in perfect definition. I find you compromise less with B&W's various lines, but then again one misses some strengths only Magneplanars bring to the table, err planars of all sorts.

You are so right about the complete and total primacy of listening and liking what you hear! You are the one living with it, not the pride of great specs!

I wish I could find what Anthony Cordesman stated about it's your fault if you don't audition or not have a return policy for purchases! I have learned through experience, it doesn't matter how much half off is on a purchase you don't like in the long run. It is key that you like what YOU hear.

Yes, it's Mister, but whatever. Keep on keeping on Mark! I've read Soundstage! for years now and I wish you the absolute best in your communications no matter where they are!

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 10:12pm

to see if I can write or I'm talking out my ass :D

I did several recording columns for their experience site (you can even hear my playing, with the mistake I purposely left in so you know it's me), the Kinki Studio headphone amp (sounds better than it measures), Schiit Modi MB (the one that got me the job, I tried to throw a little Herb in that one though Art Dudley is my fave of all time), Cambridge DAC Magic, Denefrips Ares II (even NOS w/ Denefrips the signal is oversampled, it's in the measurements, figured out by a guy on YouTube), and the Coda CLARUS dongle headphone amp (kinda like an Audioquest Dragonfly).

My reference equip changed significantly when I inherited money a few years ago, i.e. got it the actual old fashioned way lol.

I've got a unit in for review, it's late (I think - I asked when they wanted it done and got no answer). I hit my deadlines, but, you know, I need an acutal deadline to hit. It's also hard to write because while not my cuppa it would be great for a LOT of people so I gotta be a legit critic and surpress my preferences to give a useful review (it will be positive because listening I can hear that most people would really like it).

I also had the weirdest experience that subjectivists would freak out about. I have a Pass XP-22 pre-amp (Wayne Colburn my be better at small signal than Nelson is at power amps, he's that good), and all my headphone amps resolve detal significantly better via the tape loop on the XP-22 than on their own direct from the source. Including my Pass HPA-1 (designed by neither Wayne nor Nelson). I'm still waiting on the measurement that covers that one.

Pssst, also I know this is verboten to say but I like MQA for reviewing DACs and listening to unknown equipment - every MQA DAC *should* sound exactly the same except the analog stage, which removes a variable from the listening experience.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 10, 2024 - 10:09am

On the Modi review. As well as the Ares 2. I was looking at this unit, and the Holoaudio Cyan 2. After your mind-blowing statement, I will pass over all Denafrips instantly.

Pass gear is obviously legendary and one of my first choices period. Power or pre.. Herb lent some nice insights there as well.

Seriously, screw all MQA-haters straight to hell. They are the same tin-eared idiots that live on ASR, don't understand the technology one iota, and dismiss listening entirely. Like all things cancel culture, they destroyed a technology and a company based on a theory threatening nothing.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 10, 2024 - 5:03pm

was the shape of the impulse response. On a true NOS DAC the top will be flat, with Denefrips it's a point. I don't know the math on oversampling without ringing, but apparently what they're doing is also why their DACs roll off more quickly above 10kHz than regular NOS ladder DACs.

We didn't figure it out, some guy on YouTube did and we verified it. The video came out like right after I'd turned in my copy.

It's a cool sounding DAC though, lots of personality, so I would listen before making a decision. I enjoyed the Ares II, just not enough to buy it. You could always get one 2nd hand and if you don't like it sell it along, they are common enough on the used market. If you have a lot of tubes in your system, it might be a bit much of a good thing lol.

Haven't heard the Cyan 2, but I have a May (KTE) and it's really good. Except with White Zombie's Astro Creep 2000 - NOS sounds like the worst digititis ever, their OS filter rounds transients, and PCM -> DSD smears the sound a little in the treble (I don't know what Herb and JA liked about the OS DSD mode, but different strokes for different folks).

Mark

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 9:39pm

One thing measurements can tell you - the power vs distortion curves that JA prints when he measures amplifier output can show whether an amp has a lot of global negative feedback or little/no negative global feedback. Look at a Pass Labs or Gryphon amp curve vs anything Ortofan recommends. I prefer minimal/no feedback. Feedback rounds transients to my ears/brain, but that's me (a drummer). Many people would take the lower distortion of neg. feedback instead and get rounded transients, and if that's what makes someone happy then cool. I ain't gonna tell 'em they're wrong for liking what they like. That would be like telling Michael Fremer he's wrong to like ABBA. I mean, he kinda is, but I'm telling him :)

I haven't heard enough feed-forward amps to form a sound opinion (small sample size). I do prefer feed forward compression to negative feedback compression ciruits though in my pro audio experience. It wouldn't surprise me if that was true with pre and power amplifiers too.

Mark.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 4, 2024 - 9:59am

That doesn't smell truthy.

Did you listen to it before you bought it?

David Harper's picture
Submitted by David Harper on January 5, 2024 - 5:52am

I've been online looking at images of B&W bookshelf speakers. The ones I recognize are in the 600 series. Especially the 601 series. That was probably the speaker I bought. And I read a few reviews of them in which some people remarked that they were bright and harsh but others said they loved them.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 4, 2024 - 11:28am

All the mud slinging at Amirm/ASR by the "rednecks" here that can't even decipher measurements, is only making ASR even stronger (which is part owned by a US Washington company Madrona Digital).
What this mag needs maybe is equal amount of measurements 2 pages, and subjective reviews 1 page that are honest with their quotes, and to leave out the "poetic license" from them and let Absolute Sound use that bullshit.

Cheers George

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 4, 2024 - 4:47pm

Keep dreaming and be frustrated by the fact that this magazine and the other magazines and blogs you dislike will NEVER use measurements as the foundation of its reviews and editorial direction etc. Poetic license is called writing. It's what magazine readers like. Blog writers of measurements don't need writing skills (though Amir is very skillful at being a dismissive jerk in his supposed summations.

MatthewT's picture
Submitted by MatthewT on January 4, 2024 - 7:33pm

That ASR is full of arrogant asshats. Insecure, as well.

Laphr's picture
Submitted by Laphr on January 7, 2024 - 11:17am

Go ahead and write a treatise in here on the specific audibility of a measurement. That's the only way to take your remark, "decipher". Please do explain forty years of professional auditioning. Start with even one component and develop a believable blow by blow that correlates all of the listening impressions to a chart.

Bonus points for explaining how this magnum opus doesn't fail the definition of objectivity.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 10:17pm

why does he constantly ask for donations? Seems sketchy to me.

-insert .jpg of Fry from Futurama giving the stink eye-

bstan921's picture
Submitted by bstan921 on January 4, 2024 - 12:10pm

I bought them a few months ago and am absolutely thrilled with them. JA's review is spot-on.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 4, 2024 - 1:58pm

We only responded to your dipshittery when you brought ASR up. I guess you cult members can't help it. You guys are now going door to door, I take it?

It's like the vegan or cross-fit joke:

How do you know someone worships ASR?

Wait a moment and they will tell you.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 5, 2024 - 7:54pm

You ASR bashers were hinted to stay on topic by bstan921

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 7, 2024 - 12:25pm

It was pretty funny.

Dorsia777's picture
Submitted by Dorsia777 on January 6, 2024 - 5:21pm

This comment section certainly scratched my itch since the forums went to the Pet Semetary lol.

I don’t trust anyone that trusts test tones first over a humans natural & emotional response to the music.

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 6, 2024 - 6:31pm

"I don’t trust anyone that trusts test tones first over a humans natural & emotional response to the music."

No one is saying to do that, but if a thing does measure bad in an area, then it can in many times be pointed to in the listening more clearly by the designer and purchaser because we know what areas to look at.
That is why we should believe in measurements and not discard them as some non-descript thing to what we are hearing. It's proved in the latest Plinius review that I pointed out, that JA measured and the reviewer also heard https://www.stereophile.com/comment/615150#comment-615150
After all every good piece of equipment that is made uses measurements/test in their design stages, any that don't are just pure voodoo bullshit.

Cheers George

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 7, 2024 - 4:18pm

would anyone hear ? Best way to counteract blow hards is to ignore them. Let's just ignore all their nonsense in the comments section as if they don't exist. Disregard these inane comments as if it was a SPAM link. By the way, I currently own speakers like the presently reviewed QAcoustics and I love what they do ( more than what they do..) Mini-monitor fake 100kz bass bump is nice to have sometimes...

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 10:21pm

But what is it about Johnny Thunders? I know a woman (frikken VP at a fortune 500 company) who thinks he's aces. Just wondering, is it the playing, the style, or some unique combo?

PS she also like the band Kix, so there may be different reasons lol.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 9, 2024 - 7:41am

the late guitarist for The New York Dolls, The Heartbreakers etc. I mean no one played guitar like him or sounded like him. He was a badass. Before the drugs took their inevitable toll on him, he was sexy as F. Great hair, great style, singular stage presence and songwriter.. He was authentically NYC and that very special brand of NY glam, punk etc. Saw him multiple times at Max's Kansas City and it was always great fun even he could be a train wreck. I mean The New York Dolls are national treasures. They were atomic and fun and were so so smart (there's a reason Morrissey loved them.) Thankfully lots of great vintage live performances on you tube and a handful of essential LPs (2 by The Dolls, LAMF by The Heartbreakers, a solo LP So Alone, and a great live from Max's LP. Is that what you meant? PS - appreciate your take on things here!

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 9, 2024 - 8:50am

Just don't make me look at David Johansen in make up. Please!

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on January 9, 2024 - 9:15am

not many people can pull that off. Compare the Dolls to Sweet ...Enough said (and I love Sweet btw.) I have original pressings of the Dolls LPs and their energy jumps out. They were smart enough to work with interesting producers (Todd Rundgren and Shadow Morton) and were just so post modern, conceptual art ahead of their time. They were a total raised middle finger to everything else going on in music at that time but they chose a different way of doing it than punk rock. Way more proto Ramones in their use of humor and satire. A strong subversive current in their presentation. I can go on and on. I doubt their LPs "measure well". but they stand up to subjective listening tests like few others.

teched58's picture
Submitted by teched58 on January 7, 2024 - 5:52am

...with the people who designed the equipment you listen to. Because they're engineers. A deterministic discipline with rules that you don't understand.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on January 8, 2024 - 10:26pm

You should go to YouTube and find a video about what The Big Bang Theory character Sheldon Cooper thinks about engineers... he's not entirely wrong XD

Mark Phillips
Contributor, Soundstage! Network

B. Sci Biochemistry, The University of Texas 2009

Dorsia777's picture
Submitted by Dorsia777 on January 7, 2024 - 7:15am

I’m just going to sell all my gear now. Guess I’ll go buy a Soundbar now.

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 7, 2024 - 8:47am

As noted previously, JA's former employer HFN is now ironically part of the same group -- AVTech Media -- that owns Stereophile (and other rags).
HFN has perhaps the most interesting section of any hi-fi mag website: a dedicated "Vintage" section that re-visits old gear with subjective and objective reviews.
I don't think the objective (Measurements) part of the Vintage reviews is that well done. It's not like JA or Amir's huge battery of tests.

JA: perhaps you can help HFN out with that!

Having said that, it's noteworthy that a major publ. (HFN) approaches this mature topic at all.

Indeed, I'm listening to CDs on a 1985 Nec CD player at the moment. It has become my reference digital source.
This is unsurprising.
Recall that Audio magazine LOVED CD players (and their sonics), right from the start at Gen 1, in 1983.
Of course Audio had heard all the best stuff - - to compare and contrast CD sound to -- giving them huge authority and credulity. They access to the best vinyl and tape-playback equip. As well as easy access to live music. And promoting a new, totally different format was risky . Especially when major players like Nakamichi and Linn were advert'ing in your rag.
But they trusted the folks at Philips, Sony, NEC, Panasonc, et. al. And (naturally) the manuf, also had access to he best vinyl and tape-playback equip. As well as easy access to live music.
They did subjective and objective tests before releasing a risky product into the mainstream public.
Just go back and read the CD player reviews by Anthony H. Cordesman and Leonard Feldman.
They are different from the audiophile press of the day. And Michael Fremer of to-day.

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 7, 2024 - 10:49am

Of course this post is off topic. Because TPTB, who "know best", of course, have disappeared the Forum (w/o discussion), and because Stereophile still carries some Internet Search Ranking respect, this off-topic message will be ... ghosted... of course.

It was noted earlier:
"Recall that Audio magazine LOVED CD players (and their sonics), right from the start at Gen 1, in 1983."

Audio mag (1947-2000, RIP!!) ... on CD players ...

Accuphase DP-70 Compact Disc Player (Dec. 1987)
"However, while it is an outstanding player in every other respect as well, there are areas where other CD players do better. The bass is deep, powerful, and extended, but a few of the DP-70's rivals provide this performance with more detail and a better ability to reproduce the bass viol and cello. Some other players reproduce the rapid dynamic changes in music more realistically and reproduce the lower midrange and upper bass more accurately.

No piece of high-end equipment I have ever heard, however, has done everything better than its rivals. The Accuphase has its greatest strengths in the area where improved performance is most important to enjoying music, particularly classical music, female voice, acoustic rock, and naturally recorded jazz. It is particularly impressive in its ability to handle massed strings, woodwinds, and complex choral music. More broadly, it is the kind of unit that is worth auditioning just to see what CD can do. Once you hear it, you won't find it easy to settle for less.

-Anthony H. Cordesman"

-----------
Kenwood DP-1100B Compact Disc Player (Equip. Profile; Jan. 1985)
"Sound quality of the Kenwood player was about the same as that of most other recently tested CD players using this type of D/A conversion and analog filtering. Feed well-made CDs into the drawer of the DP-1100B, and you will be greeted by musical reproduction that is thrilling, to say the least. If you try playing some of the early CD releases, however, you'll conclude that digital audio is not what it's cracked up to be. Whatever you do, don't blame digital audio or the particular player you happen to be using at the time. Put the blame where it belongs, and credit the CD player (such as this one from Kenwood) for being the marvelous engineering feat that it is."

-Leonard Feldman

----------------
NEC CD-650E Compact Disc Player (Equip. Profile, Dec. 1986)

"Use and Listening Tests

I have found that the sound of a piano is one of the most difficult to reproduce faithfully. Furthermore, even if mike placement and recording technique are good, some CD players will impart to piano sounds an unnatural and some what strident character which is immediately apparent (even to less-experienced listeners). It was for this reason, in addition to the fact that I like the music, that one of the CDs I used to check out this player was a new Telarc release offering Prokofiev's Piano Concerto No. 3 and Tchaikovsky's Piano Concerto No. 1, played by Jon Kimura Parker with Andre Previn conducting the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. I'm told that Schoeps MK-2 and MK-4 mikes were used and that the digital recorder was a modified version of Sony's PCM-1610. Monitor speakers were B & W 801Fs (no wonder the recording engineers got the balance right). To put it succinctly, the sound reproduced by the NEC CD-650E hooked up to my reference system was absolutely superb-as good as I've heard from just about any CD player.

The supplied remote control worked flawlessly, and when listening to non-classical fare, I found the ability to do random-access programming from my easy chair rather a nice convenience. I'll even confess to having pushed the open/close button a couple of times from across the room, even though that feature serves no practical purpose. Oh, well, NEC can be forgiven for this slight over-embellishment, in light of the excellent player they have created at a very reasonable price."

-Leonard Feldman
==========

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 8, 2024 - 9:39am

I have a 1986 NEC CD-650 that Mr. Feldman raved about -- it uses NEC's own 2x oversampling and Burr-Brown PCM56 and a very unique 9th Chebyshev active LPF "chip".

Here is another NEC cdp from my collection. Dist. in US by MCS for JC Penny dept stores in 1985. 2x oversampling , Burr-Brown PCM54. I paid $50 for it (I've heard that you can get them for $5 at thrift stores). I won't comment about its sound. HFN "Vintage" are better at that type of "journalism". My best attempt at "ragism": Real-world high-end sonics still exist. Period. Full-stop.

image

image
picture uploader

image

https://i.postimg.cc/3RYwgM8f/image.jpg

https://i.postimg.cc/XvpvLKdd/image.jpg

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 10, 2024 - 10:02am

Well, it's a good thing digital audio technology hasn't changed since 1987!

Scoop up all those old cd players and make a killing with your own website!

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 10, 2024 - 10:22am

"Well, it's a good thing digital audio technology hasn't changed since 1987!"
And analog TECHNOLOGY since the early 1940's.
But aesthetics and "bling" factor are another ... ahem ... STORY ;)

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 10, 2024 - 10:29am

I feel bad for you being a dyed-in-the-wool Luddite. Sigh.

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 10, 2024 - 11:19am

...are you ALSO a trolling hyena?

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 10, 2024 - 11:24am

For your complete ignorance, YES.

I've been here for over 20 years, well past this website last reset.

Why are you here again? Do explain.

hollowman's picture
Submitted by hollowman on January 10, 2024 - 1:44pm

SHARP DX-SX1 ¥250,000 (released in December 1999)

"A super audio CD player based on 1-bit audio technology that was announced at the same time as the 1-bit amplifier SM-SX1.

For the mechanism part, Sharp have adopted a newly developed ultra-thin, highly reliable CD mechanism that uses aluminum die-casting for the tray and zinc die-casting for the chassis to suppress resonance. The optical pickup has also been miniaturized with an ultra-thin 1-lens 2-beam type.
In addition to the spindle motor, a stepping motor for pickup is also used to achieve speedy reading.

The operation panel has a mirror face made of machined acrylic and vapor-deposited aluminum.

Equipped with a 1BIT terminal, by connecting to the 1-bit amplifier SM-SX1, pure 1-bit transmission and amplification is possible until just before the speaker. (This connection requires a dedicated cable (included with DX-SX1).)

A wireless remote control is included."

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on January 10, 2024 - 2:21pm

HOWWWWWWWWLLLLLLLLL! Lickin my chops... eyeing you up. You look delicious!

I think your sweet SACD player is pregnant. What's the bulge on the bottom of the player or are you just excited to troll me?

I think you need a day job.

bhkat's picture
Submitted by bhkat on January 7, 2024 - 6:24pm

For classical music, CD and digital makes the music(esp soft music) come out of a blackness that LPs just don't match. That was apparent from the first CD I played on my Magnavox CD player in 1983(Ein Straussfest).

Trevor_Bartram's picture
Submitted by Trevor_Bartram on January 11, 2024 - 1:04am

There is so much gear being introduced one cannot hope to audition everything, so measurements enable sorting of wheat from chaff. We are lucky to have many review sources BUT it takes intelligence & time to interpret reviews & comments. There is much snake oil in HiFi, caveat emptor, & beware of products 'designed' by focus groups, particularly loudspeakers. It's easy to be fooled, twenty years ago I spent a month auditioning bookshelf speakers, it was exhausting, I settled on a speaker that was well reviewed by JA etc. I auditioned them in a large open room with no close surfaces on superb equipment. I purchased them & listened to rock & jazz for 18 years, then added an FM tuner (& streamed radio) only to discover male announcers were overly 'chesty' & unpleasant. The previously measured & reported 4dB bass boost at 150Hz will do that. That was alarming, I'm an engineer & have since 'fixed' the problem. This coming from someone who could 'tell' the difference between my NAD amp pre/main shorting links & a short good quality cable (cable preferred)! What fun this hobby is!!

Trevor_Bartram's picture
Submitted by Trevor_Bartram on January 11, 2024 - 1:14am

Has anyone scientifically described the internal resonator technology used by Q-Acoustics for the last ten years? The 5040's shelved bass response is ideal for speaker placement close to a wall but here (& with the KEF R3) the port is placed on the rear rather than the front, where it would be more effective. Is the placement just a matter of visual aesthetics?

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 12, 2024 - 10:49am

"only to discover male announcers were overly 'chesty' & unpleasant. The previously measured 4dB bass boost at 150Hz will do that. That was alarming,"

And that's why there should be even more objective measurements/tests as a valuable tool for any potential buyers (that can read them) to aid with any audio purchase, instead of "only believing" reviewers romantic/poetic wordings.
Many times they can coincided with each other if it comes out in the subjective listening review.

If it's bad in an objective measurement/test area, but not picked up in the subject listening review, be very cautious before you purchase that product.

Cheers George

Trevor_Bartram's picture
Submitted by Trevor_Bartram on January 12, 2024 - 2:19pm

Bass boost used to be pretty common in mini monitors (LS3/5A etc) less so now. I went 18 years thinking if I space them a 1/4 wavelength at 150Hz from the rear wall, I'd be OK. Well that theory didn't pan out & it took 18 years to discover it, duh.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on January 13, 2024 - 10:49am

What finally broke the spell was male FM disc jockeys?

Likely, those 18 years were fine until you ran into what stations do to the sound of DJ's voices. It's too late now, but for fun, look up what the stations do to how the DJ sounds: it's an industry. They equalize and compress until any DJ can sound like he should be singing the lead in Mephistopheles!

I would expect George to fall for that, but, really. Give those 18 years some credit.

Trevor_Bartram's picture
Submitted by Trevor_Bartram on January 13, 2024 - 2:15pm

WCRB (classical, FM & online), WQXR (classical) & KKJZ (jazz) both online. They sound good (no compression etc?) on my Sennheiser headphones. Enjoy!
P.S. The initial fix (to prove the point) was a Twin-T 3dB 150Hz electronic notch filter between my pre/main amp. The final fix was XO modifications to reduce baffle step compensation by 3dB & reduce XO losses. It took about a month of incremental changes & listening on speakers & headphones to get it right. Midrange clarity has improved considerably. Very happy now, well worth doing!!

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 13, 2024 - 1:01pm

Like I said, in the other new Audio Research tube amp review about compression.
"If you have no quiet, you have no loud"

Look what happen to this album, the more it got re-mastered and re-issued
http://tinyurl.com/2m7h4elt

Trevor_Bartram's picture
Submitted by Trevor_Bartram on January 13, 2024 - 2:44pm

Yes, early CDs are often the best sounding, as long as the source & mastering are good. The problem with streaming is: often only the latest remaster is available & previous versions are deleted & often with little to no provenance info, caveat emptor?

georgehifi's picture
Submitted by georgehifi on January 13, 2024 - 3:05pm

Trevor_Bartram: "The problem with streaming is: often only the latest remaster is available & previous versions are deleted"

Correct, and they mostly sound squashed (compressed) compared to the earlier previous versions because that's all they can get their hand on to stream to you. And the trouble with streaming there is no provenance of what you get streamed to you.

EG: http://tinyurl.com/2m7h4elt

Cheers George

X