The only problem I have with Jon is a massive amount of non-proven hypotheticals. It sounds good if you take everything he says as factual and proven, but it's not... or at least I've not seen it published anywhere.
A lot of this discussion has stemmed from the AHB2 amps (it came from that thread)... interesting what Benchmark's chief designer says about listening and measuring, very interesting articles:
https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes
The first paragraph of his
Listening vs. Measuring article caught my attention right away.
At Benchmark, listening is the final exam that determines if a design passes from engineering to production. When all of the measurements show that a product is working flawlessly, we spend time listening for issues that may not have shown up on the test station. If we hear something, we go back and figure out how to measure what we heard. We then add this test to our arsenal of measurements.
Even though measurements show no flaws, they still listen, and if they identify something different, they figure out a way to measure what they heard. This is truly amazing to me. Take a look at the products they make, and take a look a the specs, and look at the unbelievably crazy good specs verified by numerous people taking measurements with the best gear available to do so. Then imagine that these guys at Benchmark STILL listen for differences and THEN figure out a way to measure those differences. They firmly believe that if they hear a difference, they should be able to measure it.
I can't see where he would not be as qualified as any other in the industry. So pick your poison... there are a LOT of different schools of thought out there that in some ways contradict each other.
It is amazing, but clearly Benchmark knows that the ultimately their battery of tests in not enough to ship a design.
They listen to these amps with a variety of loads.
Perhaps, they have found in listening, unexpected results. Once observed, a test was made that uncovered the source.
Observation, leads to analysis that leads to correction that ultimately completes with observation.
I believe that everything that can be heard can be measured, but not everything heard is necessarily measured.
Amplifier manufacturers are not guaranteed to measure the same, some are more comprehensive than others.
Manufacturers (the good ones) perform all standard measurements found in reviews, they know the tests.
Simply reciting, that everything can be heard is measured is simplistic.
Obviously, amps have different design goals and will measure to assure that they achieve them.
This is the nature of product development.
There are many "objectivists" in audio that have made up their minds and can be every bit as intransigent as the pure subjectivist.
Personally, I want more and better measurements.
The "working within their limits" is near meaningless statement that cannot be determined.
Many amps wont accurately display when they are clipping, soft clipping, current limiting a transient, etc.
An AVR amp has a measurement goals but also, perhaps more important, reliability goals.
It is critical that these products operate and sound good to the target audience.
Those leaning objectivist (as I am), still need to probe the conditions of the listening session.
There are weaknesses to all and any findings have limitations and may not provide meaningful efficacy for all systems.
- Rich
