[dr_skoobie]

Some interesting debate around the moderator's conclusions.

https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/selah-audio-rc3r-3-way-speaker-review.11218/

[RonN5]

To my way of thinking, while it is interesting to see “the numbers”... it would be nice if there was a way to correlate their data with owner experience.   Just looking at the drivers used and considering the timeframe... early 2000s... I suspect the sound is a lot better than one might gather from the ASR review.

[Rick Craig]

Some interesting debate around the moderator's conclusions.

https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/selah-audio-rc3r-3-way-speaker-review.11218/

Not along ago I applauded Amir for acquiring the Klippel system to do measurements. I had wondered if a speaker that I designed would be tested - it happened sooner than I expected...lol

[Boschman]

I imagine you now have access to better drivers, measurement tools and the like compared to back then?

[RonN5]

Measuring sound and electrical characteristics of audio equipment in a way that "accurately" correlates with buyer preference is a worthy goal.  Along the way, it is important not to come up with "unproven" and "unsupported" rankings that can easily damage a manufacturers reputation.

I support that ASR is measuring DAC's and rank ordering them SINAID as they do a pretty good job of explaining what SINAID is...but I think it is a huge stretch for them to suggest that SINAID can be easily correlated with sound and sound preference....thereby implying that the rankings are a good predictor or good sound in your own system.

As for loudspeakers....Harman has been very careful with spinorama, how they use it, how they promote it, how they talk about the competition with it....ASR...it appears...maybe not so much.

IF they are seriously interested in advancing the state of the art, they have to accept that equipment that measures the same doesn't always sound the same...and at some point, we will better understand why.

[Rick Craig]

To my way of thinking, while it is interesting to see “the numbers”... it would be nice if there was a way to correlate their data with owner experience.   Just looking at the drivers used and considering the timeframe... early 2000s... I suspect the sound is a lot better than one might gather from the ASR review.

I posted a reply in the review thread.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/selah-audio-rc3r-3-way-speaker-review.11218/page-5

[Rick Craig]

I imagine you now have access to better drivers, measurement tools and the like compared to back then?

Some things have changed - the midrange is still very good but there are better options for the woofer and tweeter. The measurement tools are similar but more importantly the 15+ years of experience since the speaker was designed.

[Carl V]

interesting.

Appreciated your considered & measured response...as well as your
offer to assist the owner with a XO adjustment----nice Customer Support.
 

[RonN5]

Rick,

I think your response was measured and well thought out.  I'm hoping that if you send them one of your more current designs...that you remind them to listen before testing....and I also think you should tell them what you were trying to accomplish with the design and what they are likely to find when they measure it so they don't have room for that "gotcha" moment.

If you scan through a bunch of the posts, there sure seems to be a strong bent toward the numbers tell the story and anything you actually hear that is not in line with the numbers must be wrong....almost the opposite of the posters on Audiogon.

[Tyson]

Rick,

I think your response was measured and well thought out.  I'm hoping that if you send them one of your more current designs...that you remind them to listen before testing....and I also think you should tell them what you were trying to accomplish with the design and what they are likely to find when they measure it so they don't have room for that "gotcha" moment.

If you scan through a bunch of the posts, there sure seems to be a strong bent toward the numbers tell the story and anything you actually hear that is not in line with the numbers must be wrong....almost the opposite of the posters on Audiogon.

That's why I stay here on AC - one of the places of sanity in this hobby.

[Norman Tracy]

Reading the five pages of the Audosciencereview Selah thread it struck me 1/3 speaker review and 2/3 learning to use a very complex new measurement system. How very 2020 to do that in public.

[Boschman]

I take the whole speaker scoring system with a grain of salt and I think most members of ASR would agree. But I don't think it'd be wise to throw out the whole suite of measurements that are taken with the Klippel NFS. Overall this is a positive for prospective speaker customers since most manufacturers provide little, if any, data. Obviously Selah Audio provides way more data than most manufacturers in this regard. Amir moves pretty fast with his tests but it would be nice if there was a dialogue with the designer/manufacturer prior to posting. If only to help clear the air so there aren't incorrect assumptions or conclusions.

[jtcf]

ASR is not interested in sound quality at all,only measurements.Anyone that's been in our hobby even for just a few years knows that the two don't go hand in hand.It would be more useful to delve into why particular distortions are pleasing to the ear.

[Boschman]

That is really not a fair assessment but I'm not going to engage in that topic. I look forward to the possibility of Rick working with Amir in the future on more measurements.

[jtwrace]

ASR is not interested in sound quality at all,only measurements.Anyone that's been in our hobby even for just a few years knows that the two don't go hand in hand.It would be more useful to delve into why particular distortions are pleasing to the ear.

Not only is that wrong, there is a direct correlation to his work (speaker and electronic measurements) and what is audible whether you choose to learn about it or not. 

[cujobob]

Not only is that wrong, there is a direct correlation to his work (speaker and electronic measurements) and what is audible whether you choose to learn about it or not.

Polar response and spectral decay are very telling regarding how a speaker will sound in a normal room, but design preference and speaker type (open baffle, as an example) is also a factor people need to know about.

Objective measurements as a primary way of looking at sound quality should concern all of us. It's very ease to misinterpret data or misrepresent it...or simply leave off telling measurements. It is, however, a great addition to subjective reviews.

We don't have a tremendous understanding of acoustics and what all forms what we define as 'sound quality.' Look at how many people make bold claims after showing measurements who also think blind testing is a great tool (despite the fact the human brain can't remember sound for more than short periods, likely too short to be able to do a real comparison of sound quality).

[HT cOz]

Reading the five pages of the Audosciencereview Selah thread it struck me 1/3 speaker review and 2/3 learning to use a very complex new measurement system. How very 2020 to do that in public.

 

[Rick Craig]

Measuring sound and electrical characteristics of audio equipment in a way that "accurately" correlates with buyer preference is a worthy goal.  Along the way, it is important not to come up with "unproven" and "unsupported" rankings that can easily damage a manufacturers reputation.

I support that ASR is measuring DAC's and rank ordering them SINAID as they do a pretty good job of explaining what SINAID is...but I think it is a huge stretch for them to suggest that SINAID can be easily correlated with sound and sound preference....thereby implying that the rankings are a good predictor or good sound in your own system.

As for loudspeakers....Harman has been very careful with spinorama, how they use it, how they promote it, how they talk about the competition with it....ASR...it appears...maybe not so much.

IF they are seriously interested in advancing the state of the art, they have to accept that equipment that measures the same doesn't always sound the same...and at some point, we will better understand why.

With DACS it's a little more black and white than speakers. The spin-o-rama is considered to be 86% correct or reliable. My quesion is what was (or is) the 14% about?

[Rick Craig]

Rick,

I think your response was measured and well thought out.  I'm hoping that if you send them one of your more current designs...that you remind them to listen before testing....and I also think you should tell them what you were trying to accomplish with the design and what they are likely to find when they measure it so they don't have room for that "gotcha" moment.

If you scan through a bunch of the posts, there sure seems to be a strong bent toward the numbers tell the story and anything you actually hear that is not in line with the numbers must be wrong....almost the opposite of the posters on Audiogon.

That's why I suggested that he has a listening session before looking at the numbers.

[Rick Craig]

ASR is not interested in sound quality at all,only measurements.Anyone that's been in our hobby even for just a few years knows that the two don't go hand in hand.It would be more useful to delve into why particular distortions are pleasing to the ear.

I would disagree - even objectivists listen.