WiiM Pro Plus reviewed by amirm on AudioScienceReview

[VintageFlanker]

According to this he puts it higher than the RME ADI 2.

What ADI 2 are you refering to ? How is it "higher" exactly?

Maybe bias, don’t really care it’s only my ears that matters.

That's the very meaning of bias : If it is indeed bias, then it is not your ears. Nor reality.

and yes they were level matched.

Which output Ref Level/dBu with the ADI ?

if you reviewed a car purely on its measured performance alone would be a less than true review.

Apples and oranges. Both designing and measuring D/A conversion is a hell simpler.

music is as much about emotion and feeling over technical achievement.

Music emotion and feeling are not related to gears at all. Music and music reproduction are absolutely different things. A DAC is not a music instrument, nor a musician. Creating music is Art (subjective). Reproducing it is 100% on the technical side (objective). If you want some improper (coloured ≠ transparent) reproduction of it, then, and only then, it is subjective again.

 

[Achim1811]

Just to make that clear: I also prefer Stereophile.
But hey, so great to have the choice.
Edit: So great to read both

 

[Wiimer]

The obsession towards his reviews worries me. There is more to any component than measurements. According to this he puts it higher than the RME ADI 2. I know which one I prefer the sound of and I have both. Found the dac in the PP to sound congested when you have a lot going on in the mix and a bit too zingy. The RME with just a small nuc thin client streaming to it using Roon Bridge sounded much better in the same system using Squeezelite or Chromecast from Roon and yes they were level matched. Infact Chromecast doesn’t sound as good on the PP to my ears as Squeezelite, always found CC a bit off on all devices, yet it measures the same. Maybe bias, don’t really care it’s only my ears that matters.

if you reviewed a car purely on its measured performance alone would be a less than true review. Subjectively is as important as any technical performance, music is as much about emotion and feeling over technical achievement.

Prefer Stereophile over Amir any day of the week as it covers both bases.

Hi, @CrystalGipsy.

Sorry, I said that with the intention of a light joke. I wasn't seriously worried about the Amirm review.
I didn't think that my casual remark would be a source of discussion.

Subjectivity is yours alone, and it is also mine. That's why I don't refer to other people's subjective reviews. Of course, in the end, I choose the sound that my ears like.

Compared to a car, it is difficult to grasp the performance of audio in advance. Measurements allow me to know more about the performance of my products. This will increase the odds of not having to buy broken audio.

And another reason why I refer to the measurement is the placebo effect. In other words, for me, audio with good measurements is more likely to sound good.

Cheers.

 

[onlyoneme]

Stay golden Ponyboy.

I wouldn't say that considering the fact that he was the one who brought DRC issue to attention when most of the people preferred to believe that everything is fine because the Mini passed RME bit-perfect test.

 

[bernard23]

The obsession towards his reviews worries me. There is more to any component than measurements. According to this he puts it higher than the RME ADI 2. I know which one I prefer the sound of and I have both. Found the dac in the PP to sound congested when you have a lot going on in the mix and a bit too zingy. The RME with just a small nuc thin client streaming to it using Roon Bridge sounded much better in the same system using Squeezelite or Chromecast from Roon and yes they were level matched. Infact Chromecast doesn’t sound as good on the PP to my ears as Squeezelite, always found CC a bit off on all devices, yet it measures the same. Maybe bias, don’t really care it’s only my ears that matters.

if you reviewed a car purely on its measured performance alone would be a less than true review. Subjectively is as important as any technical performance, music is as much about emotion and feeling over technical achievement.

Prefer Stereophile over Amir any day of the week as it covers both bases.

Just to add to this. Measurement is an objective way of comparing similar things, it doesn't mean it sounds good it means it performs well. Not everyone likes the sound of hifi, probably because it's artificial and also because everyone's room acoustics are different, and then we're all different. The car analogy is usefull, I love Alfas because of a emotional thing, my mates think I'm stupid. They have similar specs to their cars. Therein lies the problem of subjectivism, it's only true for one person. The problem occurs when we start believing someone else's subjective opinion as truth, and that human fallibility is the bedrock upon which the entire consumer audio business is built on.
What is more useful is to challenge what is being measured, and how. Anyone can use a steel tape measure, but how do you know if its right. This is where ASR gets a bit suspect unless there are multiple testers all coming to the same or very close results.

 

[VintageFlanker]

The problem occurs when we start believing someone else's subjective opinion as truth, and that human fallibility is the bedrock upon which the entire consumer audio business is built on.

Absolutely right. If one is "trusting his own ears only", then what would be the point for any review at all, whatever subjective or objective ? That reminds me a video from Gene :

This is where ASR gets a bit suspect unless there are multiple testers all coming to the same or very close results.

Which is exactly the case here. -> Post #6.

 

[bernard23]

In fairness, there are multiple devices that have been tested more than once on ASR, but not everyone who subscribes is a scientist, although they rightly believe it is the correct approach, and thus almost worship Amir for his work.
In practice, for things that really matter, the measurement data without an uncertainty statement is also of little use.
Don't misunderstand me though, ASR is absutely the most useful information source on consumer audio by far.

 

[Wiimer]

Just to add to this. Measurement is an objective way of comparing similar things, it doesn't mean it sounds good it means it performs well. Not everyone likes the sound of hifi, probably because it's artificial and also because everyone's room acoustics are different, and then we're all different. The car analogy is usefull, I love Alfas because of a emotional thing, my mates think I'm stupid. They have similar specs to their cars. Therein lies the problem of subjectivism, it's only true for one person. The problem occurs when we start believing someone else's subjective opinion as truth, and that human fallibility is the bedrock upon which the entire consumer audio business is built on.
What is more useful is to challenge what is being measured, and how. Anyone can use a steel tape measure, but how do you know if its right. This is where ASR gets a bit suspect unless there are multiple testers all coming to the same or very close results.

I agree.
And your words are clear and simple, very easy to understand for me.

I always check the comparison video before buying anything. For example, a comparison of smartphone cameras is very helpful. The other day I bought a projector based on his review. I don't rely entirely on measurement and comparison videos, but I don't think it's a bad idea to gather the right information (I need to examine multiple comparisons to find out if this is true or not.)

It doesn't seem easy to make a video comparing audio performance, but I hope there will be more comparison videos like this.

 

[Mike-48]

Repeatability itself is very important to begin with.

Yes, a critical yet oft-overlooked fact.

 

[bernard23]

Yes, a critical yet oft-overlooked fact.

In "proper" science, it's a pre-requisite. For something to become enshrined as a recognised international standard, e.g ISO then testing needs to be completed by multiple labs, and all reach a conclusion that lies within a specific uncertainty range as prescribed by the IBM (International Bureau of Metrology). Otherwise it remains as an interesting hypothesis.