Bad news for the IA80.1

[KyleBrown 121]

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

[TaylorFade 0]

You guys crack me up.

Who invited this guy?

 

Lol. Just passing through.

 

 

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

 

 

Mmm... soup sandwich.

[EPerez 236]

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

Going through I don't think they meant you were bashing the company/nick but others. I don't see how they're being sarcastic. Impious, tirefryr and shizzzon were trying to explain. M5 was the only one being sarcastic and was only doing it because tenacious is annoying and ignorant.

I don't understand why you guys don't listen to these guys...

[KyleBrown 121]

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

Going through I don't think they meant you were bashing the company/nick but others. I don't see how they're being sarcastic. Impious, tirefryr and shizzzon were trying to explain. M5 was the only one being sarcastic and was only doing it because tenacious is annoying and ignorant.

I don't understand why you guys don't listen to these guys...

 

 

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're %100 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect. They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools  tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated. Just because you have technical training behind you and some real world exercise, doesn't mean you have the right to discredit everyone else. It's easy to sit behind a computer and seem all so intelligent. There's a common factor of why a lot of people don't like this forum.  

[jcarter1885 995]

I guess car companies lie about what horsepower their cars put out as well, should we all test if a Mercedes meets its standards. If we do, then is it acceptable to use sub par equipment and use those results as the end of all be all. 

 

Guys get out your feelings, some of you are too emotional to even understand the logic behind it. Its not like were talking about Shark, Audiopipe or other amps that just make a product and hope people buy it.

 

Thread is stupid and all this back and forth is stupid.

[EPerez 236]

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

Going through I don't think they meant you were bashing the company/nick but others. I don't see how they're being sarcastic. Impious, tirefryr and shizzzon were trying to explain. M5 was the only one being sarcastic and was only doing it because tenacious is annoying and ignorant.

I don't understand why you guys don't listen to these guys...

 

 

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're 0 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect. They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools  tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated. Just because you have technical training behind you and some real world exercise, doesn't mean you have the right to discredit everyone else. It's easy to sit behind a computer and seem all so intelligent. There's a common factor of why a lot of people don't like this forum.  

I'm sure if it was you and them talking they would and you ask them to explain In depth more about the calibrations and whatever it is that is wrong with the clamp test then they would. I think the problem here was tenacious being a little douche. Honestly the guys on here, the tech team and mods, are the main people I listen too. This is why I love this forum, they don't let useless or misleading information stand unlike other forums.

Pretty sure these guys are extremely smart and know what they're doing so yes it comes off as being intelligent but they're not insulting. Only a few on here can be dicks but that's ONLY because someone starts it first (not you the other guy).

Don't take this as me attacking you. Just what I'm observing to help everyone see better.

[Tony Nelson 8]

 

Yeap, I have no idea what's going on. I'm completely clueless. By no means have I been bashing or soiling Nick or IA's rep. I have no reason to that. Maybe you guys forget what they've done for me. I haven't. No one has answered my questions yet but I knew that would happen. It's always a dick measuring contest. Who can be the better sarcastic prick! Soup sandwich. 

Going through I don't think they meant you were bashing the company/nick but others. I don't see how they're being sarcastic. Impious, tirefryr and shizzzon were trying to explain. M5 was the only one being sarcastic and was only doing it because tenacious is annoying and ignorant.

I don't understand why you guys don't listen to these guys...

 

 

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're %100 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect. They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools  tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated. Just because you have technical training behind you and some real world exercise, doesn't mean you have the right to discredit everyone else. It's easy to sit behind a computer and seem all so intelligent. There's a common factor of why a lot of people don't like this forum.  

Maybe you should go and seek some education and then you might understand just how much money, time, equipment, etc... goes into testing, measuring, certifying etc. Right now it seems that all these guys are "talking circles rather then being direct" but you clearly do not understand this subject.  Once you go out and find the necessary knowledge, then you will realize how right these few guys are.  Until then, argue on and have fun!! 

[Tenacious 32]

Because I'M the douche. Lmao, okay. I disagree with the almighty tech team, so that instantly makes me incorrect and a douche? We're calculating amplifier power here. A very slight flaw in tolerance in the equipment is okay. It's not like we're trying to be exact to seventeen decimal places. This test gives an estimate (a pretty close one, may I add) to the real results. Just because I don't hide myself behind fancy vocabulary doesn't mean that I'm clueless.

 

And as for me, I'm not bothering with posting again. There's no need, because apparently everyone here already knows it all.

[EPerez 236]

Because you disagree with them doesn't make you wrong or a douche but changing my words around makes you a douche dumbass. But they have proven themselves to be very knowledgable and are definitely not stupid people one bit.

Only reason I said you were a douche was because almost the whole time you were just fighting with everyone and being sarcastic instead of trying to understand their view.

[Tenacious 32]

Because you disagree with them doesn't make you wrong or a douche but changing my words around makes you a douche dumbass. But they have proven themselves to be very knowledgable and are definitely not stupid people one bit.

Only reason I said you were a douche was because almost the whole time you were just fighting with everyone and being sarcastic instead of trying to understand their view.

I understand their view, and their concern is not legitimate in this case, in my opinion. The results may not be 100% precise, but they're accurate enough for the purpose they serve. If you require an amp test to be accurate within 10 watts for your personal use.... so be it. I don't.

 

You're the only one name calling here... 

[Impious 1,476]

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're 0 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect.

Reread the thread. 95Honda and M5 both posted reasons why. No one supporting the test even responded to those posts with a meaningful reply. And frankly we've discussed clamp tests on this forum a couple dozen times. Last I checked the search function worked fine....

They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated.

And if you were paying attention, you would have understood this was M5's point. The READER shouldn't HAVE to ask. A valid test conducted in a meaningful and useful manor would have that information presented as part of the details of the test. The very fact we would NEED to ask in itself supports the test's lack of credibility and the fact the tester either isn't aware of these factors or doesn't know how to calculate them, or more likely both.

But because he's posted numbers, the internet assumes it's valid and meaningful and it's everyone else's job to prove why this isn't the case. That is exactly ass backwards of how science and metrology actually works in the "real world". The onus is on the tester to prove it's validity, not the other way around. And he hasn't done that, nor have you or anyone else supporting the test....but that doesn't keep the lemmings from jumping on board with it.

Though you blissfully skipped over 95Hondas post where he stated he's had Fluke meter with a 25% variance while ranting about nobody citing examples of why the test is flawed. Selective memory?

there's a common factor of why a lot of people don't like this forum

Because they like to believe "numbers" regardless of whether or not those numbers actually mean anything, but don't want to put forth the effort into considering why those numbers don't mean anything. They prefer subjectivity and "experience" over true objectivity......because that's all I see when I visit other forums. Threads like this and that thread on CACO are prime examples of that.

[Tenacious 32]

 

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're 0 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect.

Reread the thread. 95Honda and M5 both posted reasons why. No one supporting the test even responded to those posts with a meaningful reply. And frankly we've discussed clamp tests on this forum a couple dozen times. Last I checked the search function worked fine....

>They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools  tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated.

And if you were paying attention, you would have understood this was M5's point. The READER shouldn't HAVE to ask. A valid test conducted in a meaningful and useful manor would have that information presented as part of the details of the test. The very fact we would NEED to ask in itself supports the test's lack of credibility and the fact the tester either isn't aware of these factors or doesn't know how to calculate them, or more likely both.

But because he's posted numbers, the internet assumes it's valid and meaningful and it's everyone else's job to prove why this isn't the case. That is exactly ass backwards of how science and metrology actually works in the "real world". The onus is on the tester to prove it's validity, not the other way around. And he hasn't done that, nor have you or anyone else supporting the test....but that doesn't keep the lemmings from jumping on board with it.

Though you blissfully skipped over 95Hondas post where he stated he's had Fluke meter with a 25% variance while ranting about nobody citing examples of why the test is flawed. Selective memory?

uote>

Because they like to believe "numbers" regardless of whether or not those numbers actually mean anything, but don't want to put forth the effort into considering why those numbers don't mean anything. They prefer subjectivity and "experience" over true objectivity......because that's all I see when I visit other forums. Threads like this and that thread on **** are prime examples of that..

 

Don't you find the statement about one fluke meter being around 25% off from the actual results rather anecdotal? I've never heard of that issue being had elsewhere.

[shizzzon 461]

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

Because you disagree with them doesn't make you wrong or a douche but changing my words around makes you a douche dumbass. But they have proven themselves to be very knowledgable and are definitely not stupid people one bit.

Only reason I said you were a douche was because almost the whole time you were just fighting with everyone and being sarcastic instead of trying to understand their view.

I understand their view, and their concern is not legitimate in this case, in my opinion. The results may not be 100% precise, but they're accurate enough for the purpose they serve. If you require an amp test to be accurate within 10 watts for your personal use.... so be it. I don't.

 

You're the only one name calling here... 

 

 

So you think it's just barely off?

 

For one, the testing method is not consistent.  Like others have stated before, it's used for TROUBLESHOOTING, not for proper power measurement.

 

Second, did you know it was recently retested by the same person and now it's went fro 13.5 to 14.6v and gained 3,200w?  Now it's over 10k clipped.

 

People are "guessing" in that topic as to how much THD that is.. 

Bam- guessing.. 

 

that method of measuring power is for troubleshooting.  For accurate results, testing must be consistent.

 

The 2 tests are not consistent and not controlled due to human error and the lack of THD measurement.

 

You can't state you obtained a certain amount of power without other factors.

Tfade has not done anything wrong to defer his measurements.  

It's the lack of knowledge the audience has that concludes what they think they obtained from that information.

 

The same thing goes for many SMD devices as well but don't get me started on that.

 

So the measurements show a lack of output power..  Well.. that's not right..  

Test again.. now we have massively increased power... 

Lack of consistency and other measurements.

 

Tfade isn't trying to replace proper means of measuring with a low cost technique.

He's basically just trying to see if the equipment holds true to it's ratings.

 

The problem is messing with amps of this caliber is not easy because the higher the numbers go, the greater the inconsistency in his testing method.

 

The audience should take THAT as a big potential problem that is hard to control.

 

Even on low power, his method will net him closer to actual ratings but still not concrete enough because of a lack of tools and technique.

 

A power rating consists of a lot more than just 1 power rating with a voltage and a THD rating and not even those 3 things have been met in sync in one test yet.

 

Like i've said many times before, I defer to the manufacturer's testing themselves as they are more equipped for the task.

[Impious 1,476]

Zero tact and constantly talking in circles rather than being direct. Discredits whatever they see fit without truly explaining why everyone else should discredit. They act as though they're 0 right, but fail to fully disclose why they are correct and someone else is incorrect.

Reread the thread. 95Honda and M5 both posted reasons why. No one supporting the test even responded to those posts with a meaningful reply. And frankly we've discussed clamp tests on this forum a couple dozen times. Last I checked the search function worked fine....

>They scream tolerances and calibrations yet never give any real numbers. They never ask what the given tools tolerances are and if they have been calibrated or when the last time they were calibrated.

And if you were paying attention, you would have understood this was M5's point. The READER shouldn't HAVE to ask. A valid test conducted in a meaningful and useful manor would have that information presented as part of the details of the test. The very fact we would NEED to ask in itself supports the test's lack of credibility and the fact the tester either isn't aware of these factors or doesn't know how to calculate them, or more likely both.

But because he's posted numbers, the internet assumes it's valid and meaningful and it's everyone else's job to prove why this isn't the case. That is exactly ass backwards of how science and metrology actually works in the "real world". The onus is on the tester to prove it's validity, not the other way around. And he hasn't done that, nor have you or anyone else supporting the test....but that doesn't keep the lemmings from jumping on board with it.

Though you blissfully skipped over 95Hondas post where he stated he's had Fluke meter with a 25% variance while ranting about nobody citing examples of why the test is flawed. Selective memory?

uote>

Because they like to believe "numbers" regardless of whether or not those numbers actually mean anything, but don't want to put forth the effort into considering why those numbers don't mean anything. They prefer subjectivity and "experience" over true objectivity......because that's all I see when I visit other forums. Threads like this and that thread on CACO are prime examples of that..

Don't you find the statement about one fluke meter being around 25% off from the actual results rather anecdotal? I've never heard of that issue being had elsewhere.

And don't you find the fact we know nothing about the accuracy of the equipment used a little troubling before trusting the results? Obviously not, and that's the problem. You promote the results and how useful they are when you or anybody else knows nothing about them.

You claim they are "close enough to count".....but the fact is you don't know, nor does anybody else. And that's one of the problems. Especially when people are using this test of unknown credibility and comparing it to manufacturer's rated power which is a specific measurement, and then making a determination of the amplifier based on that test.

Think about it for just a second. Ask yourself why actual amplifier designers and manufacturer's and other's in the audio electronics industry spend tens of thousands of dollars on test equipment if a kid in a basement is capable of duplicating the results for a few hundred dollars? I don't think it's because these multi-million or billion dollar companies are that gullible, but I certain would think it's because the engineers understand proper testing methodology and what is necessary to achieve meaningful, repeatable results.

Just because he can post some numbers doesn't mean they are useful, "real world" or "close enough to count".

[Tenacious 32]

 

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

> 

Because you disagree with them doesn't make you wrong or a douche but changing my words around makes you a douche dumbass. But they have proven themselves to be very knowledgable and are definitely not stupid people one bit.

Only reason I said you were a douche was because almost the whole time you were just fighting with everyone and being sarcastic instead of trying to understand their view.

I understand their view, and their concern is not legitimate in this case, in my opinion. The results may not be 100% precise, but they're accurate enough for the purpose they serve. If you require an amp test to be accurate within 10 watts for your personal use.... so be it. I don't.

 

You're the only one name calling here... 

 

 

So you think it's just barely off?

 

For one, the testing method is not consistent.  Like others have stated before, it's used for TROUBLESHOOTING, not for proper power measurement.

 

Second, did you know it was recently retested by the same person and now it's went fro 13.5 to 14.6v and gained 3,200w?  Now it's over 10k clipped.

 

People are "guessing" in that topic as to how much THD that is.. 

Bam- guessing.. 

 

that method of measuring power is for troubleshooting.  For accurate results, testing must be consistent.

 

The 2 tests are not consistent and not controlled due to human error and the lack of THD measurement.

 

You can't state you obtained a certain amount of power without other factors.

Tfade has not done anything wrong to defer his measurements.  

It's the lack of knowledge the audience has that concludes what they think they obtained from that information.

 

The same thing goes for many SMD devices as well but don't get me started on that.

 

So the measurements show a lack of output power..  Well.. that's not right..  

Test again.. now we have massively increased power... 

Lack of consistency and other measurements.

 

Tfade isn't trying to replace proper means of measuring with a low cost technique.

He's basically just trying to see if the equipment holds true to it's ratings.

 

The problem is messing with amps of this caliber is not easy because the higher the numbers go, the greater the inconsistency in his testing method.

 

The audience should take THAT as a big potential problem that is hard to control.

 

Even on low power, his method will net him closer to actual ratings but still not concrete enough because of a lack of tools and technique.

 

A power rating consists of a lot more than just 1 power rating with a voltage and a THD rating and not even those 3 things have been met in sync in one test yet.

 

Like i've said many times before, I defer to the manufacturer's testing themselves as they are more equipped for the task.

 

The second test was to prove a point... To get the 10k that people claim out of the amp, it was clipped to hell and back. The first test was "around" but not exactly at the THD rating that the manufacturer gives. 

 

I guess we have to throw something on an amp dyno to make you guys happy.. lol

[Tenacious 32]

 This is car audio, not quantum physics. You're still going off of this assumption that his tools are inaccurate.

 

And by manufacturers spending tens of thousands on test equipment... You mean the buildhouse in Korea in this case, correct?

Edited January 4, 2014 by Tenacious

[///M5 2,833]

Ha, that isn't a build house problem. Before any measurement you need to ask why youre doing a measurement . Take an automotive dyno. Absolute hp is not what they measure but relative. No secret tthere are huge variances but for doing a baseline and making changes it is fine. For stating an absolute no way.

The uncertainty in the test may be huge. I've seen setups where it is well over 50%. Super easy to add up which anyone doing any sort of basic metrology would undersfand. And no I am not implying any percentage off on this test, but that unless the uncertainties are reviewed the result is inappropriate. Quoting digits beyond accuracy is a lie. Thought my ruler analogy would give you a clue

[shizzzon 461]

 

 

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

>> 

Because you disagree with them doesn't make you wrong or a douche but changing my words around makes you a douche dumbass. But they have proven themselves to be very knowledgable and are definitely not stupid people one bit.

Only reason I said you were a douche was because almost the whole time you were just fighting with everyone and being sarcastic instead of trying to understand their view.

I understand their view, and their concern is not legitimate in this case, in my opinion. The results may not be 100% precise, but they're accurate enough for the purpose they serve. If you require an amp test to be accurate within 10 watts for your personal use.... so be it. I don't.

 

You're the only one name calling here... 

 

 

So you think it's just barely off?

 

For one, the testing method is not consistent.  Like others have stated before, it's used for TROUBLESHOOTING, not for proper power measurement.

 

Second, did you know it was recently retested by the same person and now it's went fro 13.5 to 14.6v and gained 3,200w?  Now it's over 10k clipped.

 

People are "guessing" in that topic as to how much THD that is.. 

Bam- guessing.. 

 

that method of measuring power is for troubleshooting.  For accurate results, testing must be consistent.

 

The 2 tests are not consistent and not controlled due to human error and the lack of THD measurement.

 

You can't state you obtained a certain amount of power without other factors.

Tfade has not done anything wrong to defer his measurements.  

It's the lack of knowledge the audience has that concludes what they think they obtained from that information.

 

The same thing goes for many SMD devices as well but don't get me started on that.

 

So the measurements show a lack of output power..  Well.. that's not right..  

Test again.. now we have massively increased power... 

Lack of consistency and other measurements.

 

Tfade isn't trying to replace proper means of measuring with a low cost technique.

He's basically just trying to see if the equipment holds true to it's ratings.

 

The problem is messing with amps of this caliber is not easy because the higher the numbers go, the greater the inconsistency in his testing method.

 

The audience should take THAT as a big potential problem that is hard to control.

 

Even on low power, his method will net him closer to actual ratings but still not concrete enough because of a lack of tools and technique.

 

A power rating consists of a lot more than just 1 power rating with a voltage and a THD rating and not even those 3 things have been met in sync in one test yet.

 

Like i've said many times before, I defer to the manufacturer's testing themselves as they are more equipped for the task.

 

The second test was to prove a point... To get the 10k that people claim out of the amp, it was clipped to hell and back. The first test was "around" but not exactly at the THD rating that the manufacturer gives. 

 

I guess we have to throw something on an amp dyno to make you guys happy.. lol

 

 

 

So, all other tests done by anyone in this aspect was not to prove a point?

Every test is to prove a point however inaccurate it might be.

 

And nothing is making us unhappy.

 

I personally do not care about the output results because i know because of inaccuracies, the results are pointless.

That's why i do not comment on how good or bad so and so amp is.

 

What I may comment on, like i am here, is the lack of understanding people get from the numbers.

 

We can go about this this way too-

on SMD a while back, someone dyno'ed a 5kw amp on the burst setting and it put out over 9k.

 

Just that alone went on for weeks and weeks across forums about how awesome the amp is.. it can do 9k, etc.. 

In reality, that test is not to test output but headroom potential which is another debate that i am not a fan of either because the reasoning makes no sense.

 

Then many people across the forums finally begin to understand how worthless the test is when you see how an amplifier is actually used.

 

This is the same way..  It's going to take a while for it to dig in but once people understand that testing must be controlled on a level that is not done here, then results are for troubleshooting, not for obtaining the ratings themselves.

[ssh 924]

Tenacious, on 04 Jan 2014 - 13:35, said:

This is car audio, not quantum physics. You're still going off of this assumption that his tools are inaccurate.

And by manufacturers spending tens of thousands on test equipment... You mean the buildhouse in Korea in this case, correct?

That's an ironic statement considering you are going off of this assumption that his tools are accurate.

If we knew for certain the dmm and clamp meter were calibrated and remotely accurate (ie: 5100watts vs 5150.5watts) then I could see using them for this situation, but if you don't know for certain how accurate they are then that's troublesome.

Then the next issue I see is measuring distortion. If you don't know what the THD is when you're measuring then it's pointless. On top of that you would need to know how accurate the measuring device for distortion is.

The results of these tests is a sum of using multiple measurement devices where none of the measurement devices are calibrated or compared to some standard. If each is off some, all together that could be a substantial difference, or perhaps it's not, but if you don't know then how can you possibly trust the results?

I don't know much about electronics or amps, but there's probably a lot more factors that go into accurately measuring an amp besides voltage, amperage, impedance, and THD, but that's all I can point out. :shrugs:

Edited January 4, 2014 by ssh

[tantric sounds 8]

Instead of talking about how inaccurate tfades test equipment is lets think about telling him what you might think he needs to have more accurate testing. There has been no talk of this equipment and or better equipment. I can bet I can go to korea with an amp in hand and go to all the manufacturers and put the same amp on their testing equipment and get slightly different results. I believe tfade is using the best that he can get his hands on and being as fair as he can. We all know its not perfect or 100% accurate but it gives an idea and that is his intent. All the bashing isn't going to help him be better. If you guys have the knowledge of better testing equipment then tell him instead of just going on and on about how his equipment isn't up to par.

Edited January 4, 2014 by tantric sounds

[Impious 1,476]

This is car audio, not quantum physics.

Valid measurement procedures and processes don't change regardless of the area of interest. Car audio and quantum mechanics are exactly the same thing as far as measurement criteria are concerned...in order to provide meaningful results, proper test methodologies must be followed otherwise the results are meaningless. Again the fact this is lost on everyone hanging their hat on this and other clamp tests is part of the problem.

You're still going off of this assumption that his tools are inaccurate.

I've yet to see any evidence to the contrary. Until proven otherwise it's an assumption that must be brought into question in order to objectively evaluate the results. Not just this clamp test, but any of them.

Just to clarify that isn't the only objection. But it's a fundamental one, and everything else isn't even worth discussing until the accuracy of the equipment and uncertainty of the measurement has been properly verified and stated. Again the fact this is lost on everyone hanging their hat on this and every other clamp test is part of the problem.

[smashedz28 110]

Instead of talking about how inaccurate tfades test equipment is lets think about telling him what you might think he needs to have more accurate testing. There has been no talk of this equipment and or better equipment. I can bet I can go to korea with an amp in hand and go to all the manufacturers and put the same amp on their testing equipment and get slightly different results. I believe tfade is using the best that he can get his hands on and being as fair as he can. We all know its not perfect or 100% accurate but it gives an idea and that is his intent. All the bashing isn't going to help him be better. If you guys have the knowledge of better testing equipment then tell him instead of just going on and on about how his equipment isn't up to par.

Being a business in this market I'm curious.. I don't think you guys make amps but let's say you did. You spend a shit ton having it properly tested and this guy goes telling everyone it does xx and spreads it like wild fire. Would you question his methods then?

[tantric sounds 8]

Instead of talking about how inaccurate tfades test equipment is lets think about telling him what you might think he needs to have more accurate testing. There has been no talk of this equipment and or better equipment. I can bet I can go to korea with an amp in hand and go to all the manufacturers and put the same amp on their testing equipment and get slightly different results. I believe tfade is using the best that he can get his hands on and being as fair as he can. We all know its not perfect or 100% accurate but it gives an idea and that is his intent. All the bashing isn't going to help him be better. If you guys have the knowledge of better testing equipment then tell him instead of just going on and on about how his equipment isn't up to par.

Being a business in this market I'm curious.. I don't think you guys make amps but let's say you did. You spend a shit ton having it properly tested and this guy goes telling everyone it does xx and spreads it like wild fire. Would you question his methods then?

Im with you there but on the flipside, why go through the trouble of multiple people questioning the method with no input on what would be the proper pieces to use. it would be the same as going to the optometrist and him telling you your glasses are wrong but not giving you the information of why it is wrong and how to fix your glasses.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

 

Instead of talking about how inaccurate tfades test equipment is lets think about telling him what you might think he needs to have more accurate testing. There has been no talk of this equipment and or better equipment. I can bet I can go to korea with an amp in hand and go to all the manufacturers and put the same amp on their testing equipment and get slightly different results. I believe tfade is using the best that he can get his hands on and being as fair as he can. We all know its not perfect or 100% accurate but it gives an idea and that is his intent. All the bashing isn't going to help him be better. If you guys have the knowledge of better testing equipment then tell him instead of just going on and on about how his equipment isn't up to par.

Being a business in this market I'm curious.. I don't think you guys make amps but let's say you did. You spend a shit ton having it properly tested and this guy goes telling everyone it does xx and spreads it like wild fire. Would you question his methods then?

Im with you there but on the flipside, why go through the trouble of multiple people questioning the method with no input on what would be the proper pieces to use. it would be the same as going to the optometrist and him telling you your glasses are wrong but not giving you the information of why it is wrong and how to fix your glasses.

 

 

No, it would be akin to going to an optometrist's assistant who claims to have knowledge and the same tools as the optometrist to do the same job the optometrist does.

[///M5 2,833]

The correct way can EVEN be done with what he has. All that has to be done is to report the uncertainty of the measurement. Very simple. The difficult part will become for the things for which there is no published uncertainty. There at least a calculation and stating what was calculated would give a ton of credibility to the test.

If you are looking for a laundry list of components to do that you shouldn't ask me. Last system I sold for doing testing on an amplifier was over $150k. There are definitely significantly cheaper methods, but that again depends on what uncertainty you would like to measure to. So again, we are back to the goal of the test if equipment is to be recommended...which is backwards as the first step should be what I described first. It is dumbfounding to me that this search wouldn't be done by anyone measuring anything. Wanting to understand things is more than half the fun of life.