AVS Forum banner

181 - 200 of 344 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
He seems to struggle with the panther grading system. To me it appears mood related at times.
I've commented on the mood thing before over there, and I agree.

Overall, it's become clear to me that measurements do matter, as his ears seem to agree with the measurements about 70% of the time, but they don't matter to the degree that the Revel guys were trying to make us believe in the "What the science shows thread". You had Revel guys over there saying "measurements can predict listener preference with 99% accuracy once bass is accounted for(ie using subwoofers), and that's just not true. ASR, if anything has moved me much more towards the subjective camp. I was fully onboard the measurements are all you need train after reading that thread(and Floyd's book), and I even bought my Revel M105s because of it. Recently, I purchased a pair of Genelec 8030c. They measure almost identically to the Revel's, yet they sound noticeably better(to my ears), so there's definitely more to it than measurements. Actually, I don't think the problem is with the measurements, but rather our ability to interpret small differences in them. Also, there's the matter of individual preference. As Floyd has said many times, measurements can predict what the majority will prefer with great accuracy, but accounting for individual preferences is near impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
Aren't the studies that reached that conclusion based on a very small testing group?
The one that generated that "99%" was smaller, but I don't remember how small. There were 13 bookshelf speakers involved, but I don't remember the number of people. The larger study that generated the "86%" figure was based on 70 loudspeakers and several hundred trained and untrained listeners. I put those figures in quotes, intentionally, as people (especially in that thread I mentioned) completely misuse it. I use to be one of those people. Even higher up Revel guys were using them as "% chance to be preferred" numbers, which is not what they are. They're correlation r2 coefficients that describe how well correlating listener preference rating are to the Olive auto generated preference rating. Saying a speaker that measures better will be preferred 86% of the time is not correct. Floyd Toole actually tried to make this correction several times(kudos to him) in that same thread, but it seems many missed those posts of his(I know I did when I read it the first time).

If you're interested in trying to use the correlation figures to get to actual % figures, there's a tool I've been using here. Enter the correlation coefficient as the SD(standard deviation), select the "Above" option and set it to 0(preferred at all), and then enter the difference between the 2 Olive scores. I used a .8 coefficient, as that's what Olive's later papers use(maybe later private tests have lowered the confidence a bit), but you can use .86 if you want.

For example, the formula predicts that this speaker should be preferred over the Ascend Sierra 2 about 70% of the time if one is using subwoofers. Without subwoofers to help, the Sierra 2 should be preferred about 70% of the time, which makes sense based on the bass response.

A more controversial comparison would be the SVS Ultra to the Revel M106. Both measured about the same(really great), but SVS wasn't recommended at all due to sounding bright. Plugging these two into the formula says that the Revel should be preferred about 55% of the time. Basically a coin flip, and a far cry from those 99% figures that folks were throwing around.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
Yeah financially, I don't see Zeos and Amir as comparable. Zeos actually makes a lot of money from what he does(see the new house). Amir loses a lot of money with his reviews, and asks for donations(0 ads on ASR) to try and lose less. Amir made all his money from Microsoft. He's retired now, and he knew going into this that ASR was gonna lose him quite a bit of his saved retirement money, but he was fed up with the state of audio reviews(glorified advertisements). It's something he cares about, and sees as a hobby(not a job) and is thus fine with spending his saved retirement money on it. He's bought like 30+ sub $400 speakers with his own money to test, and he just bought a $16,000 speaker with his own money to test. He pays for a lot of the shipping when users send in speaker, and he's also running a site with 0 adds and thousands of users with lots of interaction. Those servers can't be cheap. No way the donations make up for all of that.

I have seen him make a few snide remarks about people's opinions being less valuable just because they haven't donated, as @Lp85253 said. I'm really not a fan of that. The only other thing I really don't like about his reviews is that he has a hard time admitting when he's wrong. I have this same problem, though, so I can empathize with that. All things considered, he's the best reviewer on the internet right now. I do agree that Erin's reviews are a little better, but he does like 1/10th the volume that Amir does.

By far the biggest advantage I see of his reviews is not his fancy Klippel machine, but the fact that he either buys the speakers himself or has users ship them to him, so he's not beholden to manufacturers to give them "always positive" reviews(advertisements). He's one of maybe 5 reviewers I trust to actually say bad things about a speaker he didn't like, and that's super valuable to me, as a consumer.
i agree with most everything you say , one glaring omission though.. THE ACT.. the "I'm poor" line of bs... that's really my main comment.. it's nice that he tests speakers based on contributions, but how about we don't equate his life with the less fortunate in society,, to put it another way .. i wish i had a months rent for every time one of his flock described Amir as "Poor".. i would be paid up on rent till the end of the decade... and great evidence he has a buncha sheep brainwashed.. cause reality differs from his perception...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
Are YT reviews Zeos's full time job? Or does he have another job as primary source of income?
that's his full time job , the difference between he and Amir... Zeos doesn't claim "poverty" and act like a panhandler...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vikram Iyengar

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
+1
It's not just speakers either. It's anything audio he can measure. The fact there's no apparent ad money behind it, is the draw for me. I wouldn't necessarily buy something based on his review, but I would trust it more than joke sites like What Hi Fi?
absolutely agreed..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
i agree with most everything you say , one glaring omission though.. THE ACT.. the "I'm poor" line of bs... that's really my main comment.. it's nice that he tests speakers based on contributions, but how about we don't equate his life with the less fortunate in society,, to put it another way .. i wish i had a months rent for every time one of his flock described Amir as "Poor".. i would be paid up on rent till the end of the decade... and great evidence he has a buncha sheep brainwashed.. cause reality differs from his perception...
Are there a bunch of people saying he's poor? If so, that's dumb. ASR is definitely making him "poorer", but he's still a multi-millionaire.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
Most of the KEF(Q100, Q350) speakers he doesn't really seem to like the sound of, and most don't seem to get recommended. The KEF R3 is the second best measuring speaker to date, yet only received a mild recommendation. Genelec 8341A is the best measuring speaker there to date, yet once again only received a mild recommendation, as it didn't do well to his ears.

Probably the best example is the SVS Ultra bookshelf. It's like the 10th best measured speaker yet(with over 100 in the pool), yet got no recommendation at all because he thought it sounded bright. Buchardt S400 is another example that measured superb but didn't get recommended at first. Infinity IL10 is another example. Measured great, but wasn't recommended. Same with the Sony SS-CS5, and the Zaph Audio ZA5.2. Focal Chorus also had great measurements, but no recommendation cause he thought it sounded "boomy".

There's also been a few speakers in the opposite camp. The Revel M55XC measured as one of the worst speakers to date, yet it received the highest recommendation rating possible(golfing panther). Canton S-50 got a mild recommendation, despite being the worst speaker ever measured. There were a couple outdoor speakers tested one day after the other, recently. He recommended the one that measured bad(don't remember the name), and didn't recommend the one that measured great.


I'm not sure I agree with that. Most of the Ascend stuff hasn't measured well. The one Ascend speaker that did measure great(Horizon center), did get recommended.
i would beg to differ on the "didn't measure well" .. but point taken ..AMIR certainly didn't like the way they measured ... many others afaik would beg to differ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vikram Iyengar

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
Are there a bunch of people saying he's poor? If so, that's dumb. ASR is definitely making him "poorer", but he's still a multi-millionaire.
there certainly are .. i could easily start a fight at asr (and have.. that's where i derailed this thread, recounting said fight), but rather than believe me ,, go read some of his review conclusions where he constantly shills for donations based on his economic woes,,,it's tasteless and and disingenuous ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vikram Iyengar

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
i would beg to differ on the "didn't measure well" .. but point taken ..AMIR certainly didn't like the way they measured ... many others afaik would beg to differ...
Yeah didn't measure well may be too strong. At the time, I was defending them, as compared to what had come before, they were probably in the top 15-20% or so. Many more speakers have measured better now, though, so they've fallen to top 50% or so. So, not bad, but about average for the price. The Horizon measured really well, though, which bodes well for the other RAAL speakers in the lineup(2EX, Towers).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
there certainly are .. i could easily start a fight at asr (and have.. that's where i derailed this thread, recounting said fight), but rather than believe me ,, go read some of his review conclusions where he constantly shills for donations based on his economic woes,,,it's tasteless and and disingenuous ...
I skip over every part of the review that doesn't pertain to the speaker itself, so you may be right. I never read that part, nor do I read the parts where he explains what the spinorama is and what the various plots mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
I skip over every part of the review that doesn't pertain to the speaker itself, so you may be right. I never read that part, nor do I read the parts where he explains what the spinorama is and what the various plots mean.
understandable...but they do exist.. if you doubt me still , it's easy to verify... just start a thread questioning his financial situation... the venom will get ankle deep within minutes...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
The one that generated that "99%" was smaller, but I don't remember how small. There were 13 bookshelf speakers involved, but I don't remember the number of people. The larger study that generated the "86%" figure was based on 70 loudspeakers and several hundred trained and untrained listeners. I put those figures in quotes, intentionally, as people (especially in that thread I mentioned) completely misuse it. I use to be one of those people. Even higher up Revel guys were using them as "% chance to be preferred" numbers, which is not what they are. They're correlation r2 coefficients that describe how well correlating listener preference rating are to the Olive auto generated preference rating. Saying a speaker that measures better will be preferred 86% of the time is not correct. Floyd Toole actually tried to make this correction several times(kudos to him) in that same thread, but it seems many missed those posts of his(I know I did when I read it the first time).

If you're interested in trying to use the correlation figures to get to actual % figures, there's a tool I've been using here. Enter the correlation coefficient as the SD(standard deviation), select the "Above" option and set it to 0(preferred at all), and then enter the difference between the 2 Olive scores. I used a .8 coefficient, as that's what Olive's later papers use(maybe later private tests have lowered the confidence a bit), but you can use .86 if you want.

For example, the formula predicts that this speaker should be preferred over the Ascend Sierra 2 about 70% of the time if one is using subwoofers. Without subwoofers to help, the Sierra 2 should be preferred about 70% of the time, which makes sense based on the bass response.

A more controversial comparison would be the SVS Ultra to the Revel M106. Both measured about the same(really great), but SVS wasn't recommended at all due to sounding bright. Plugging these two into the formula says that the Revel should be preferred about 55% of the time. Basically a coin flip, and a far cry from those 99% figures that folks were throwing around.
Interesting stuff. Too late in the night for me to check it out, will do tomorrow.
I find that in general many studies often tend to result in the desired outcome the one who commissioned them wishes to prove. Think of all those research studies you often see mentioned in various publications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
i agree with most everything you say , one glaring omission though.. THE ACT.. the "I'm poor" line of bs... that's really my main comment.. it's nice that he tests speakers based on contributions, but how about we don't equate his life with the less fortunate in society,, to put it another way .. i wish i had a months rent for every time one of his flock described Amir as "Poor".. i would be paid up on rent till the end of the decade... and great evidence he has a buncha sheep brainwashed.. cause reality differs from his perception...
I read those as comic banter. You get a different feel from them. It's somewhere in the middle. He wants the donations but he won't go broke without them.
I was bored one day waiting somewhere, and loaded a bunch of reviews just to see the reasons he comes up with to ask for donations. My favorites are the ones he blames the need for money on the panthers demanding all sorts of stuff he can't afford.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
I just saw a vid yesterday where he claims it's his hobby. Not that it means anything.
zeos?.. i wouldn't doubt he considers it a hobby, but it's a hobby that pays the bills.. and he doesn't beg for money based on "poverty" .. at least not that i've seen...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,947 Posts
I read those as comic banter. You get a different feel from them. It's somewhere in the middle. He wants the donations but he won't go broke without them.
I was bored one day waiting somewhere, and loaded a bunch of reviews just to see the reasons he comes up with to ask for donations. My favorites are the ones he blames the need for money on the panthers demanding all sorts of stuff he can't afford.
i get it.. but as a person that literally lives below the poverty line with a serious disability , i find it , truthfully *very disingenuous , people that have decent wealth here in the states often dismiss their own bad behaviour as a result of the "other guy" being "oversensitive"... personally i just think Amir is fulla ****...when it comes to raising money..
 
181 - 200 of 344 Posts
Top