|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: Sample to Sample posted by Bill the K on May 1, 2012 at 20:04:51:
Bill,
Let me first say that I'm an expert only on my own reviews and don't speak for Stereophile, and certainly not for the industry.
The best short answer is "no", apart from channel matching, which is revealed during testing, and is a good (but hardly perfect) indication of consistency. (That, by the way, is a very important reason why Stereophile's measurements matter.) There's also speaker matching, which isn't really fair because high-end speakers usually matched up either during manufacture or later). What I do is pay attention to workmanship and other indications of quality control, which would tend to indicate better uniformity. But ultimately I'm always working with just one (or, in the case of speakers, two) unit(s) (unless one fails and has to be replaced). It's just not practical to test multiple units, if only because manufacturers usually can't provide them.
An aside: This is one argument in favor of expensive parts: Apart from any cryo'd qualities (or whatever) they might possess, they're more likely to be in spec than the cheap stuff (but some manufacturers will by cheap, test it in-house, then match it up, which saves money). Parts with a tighter spec lead to electronics with more consistent performance.
I believe, however--and this was my point really--that there is a difference in claims and reader expectations. Even when it comes to measurements, Stereophile (eg) makes it clear that they're presenting information about that particular unit. One hopes for general relevance, but ultimately that depends on the skill and standards of the manufacturer (not just the designer). CR presents their measurements as objective and rigorous--a standard that, in this respect, they do not meet.
Readers of audio magazines should, in my opinion, consider that it is at least possible--I'm not sure how likely--that the sound may differ from one unit to the next. (And if you want an indication of how likely this is, note how often reviewers at Stereophile report that their review samples didn't sound quite right, or didn't work at all, and had to be replaced--then consider how often, in magazines and online pubs with lower editorial standards, such things go unreported. I think its reasonable to assume that a company that sends out a review unit that doesn't work right is more likely to send an out-of-spec unit to a customer.)
Here's another aside: I had a long chat with Caelin Gabriel from Shunyata a couple of months ago. I'm not quite sure what to make of this new cable-measurements regime that they've come up with (i.e., I'm not sure how it relates to sound), but it certainly does allow them a degree of reproduceability (in, eg, electrical connections between wire and terminations) that, as far as I know, other manufacturers can't match.
I'd be interested to hear from manufacturers on this one -- Charles? Vic? -- as well as from other reviewers and editors. If it's true as most people in this industry claim that the tiniest changes are audible, sample-to-sample variation is likely to be a serious concern.
Jim
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Sample to Sample - Jim Austin 04:44:07 05/02/12 (3)
- Just for you, JA - Charles Hansen 05:07:11 05/02/12 (2)
- Thanks Charles - Jim Austin 05:39:08 05/02/12 (1)
- Value Engineering - Tony Lauck 12:08:46 05/02/12 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
