Audio Science Review of Expert 200.

[ragwo]

Review of Expert 200 in Audio Science Review. 
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum...iew.12286/

[kerkhoffd]

Isn't that a 'review' from the same Amir that started a personal crusade against the EtherREGEN?

[ragwo]

Isn't that a 'review' from the same Amir that started a personal crusade against the EtherREGEN?

That's right.

[Gerronwithit]

No idea what all those graphs mean, but did that to$$er actually listen to one. As it shut down after his first power sweep, whatever that is, I guess he didn’t! I think he would happier with an oscilloscope than a pair of ears.

[mdconnelly]

Amir has a reputation for jumping to negative conclusions and his methods have often been questioned. At the very least, there is no way to know if he was testing a faulty D200. As far as I could discern in reading this review and followup comments, he never actually listened to it (who dies that?). Sorry, I don't know Amir not have a clue as to his testing methodology, but even if his findings are correct, his publishing before any verification or validation of any kind are inexcusable.

And, of course, there's the fact that the D200 hasn't been in production for several years but his review certainly throws a ton of shade on Devialet. WTF?

[kerkhoffd]

A.f.a.i.c. Armir lost all credibility in the EtherREGEN discussion. Measuring, not listening and jumping to negative conclusions is bad form. Not even going to bother reacting to his 'review'. Hope nobody from the Devialet scene does. That is just what he seems to hope to achieve.

[ogs]

I never heard any of those measurable negatives from my D-Premier-through-250 CI. Must be because I just listen. Oh that must be it: there are no measurements for music..

[David A]

A review of an amp that hasn't been part of the current range for some years? What was the source of the amp? That's unstated and we have no way of knowing whether it was used, and used hard, before it came into his hands or whether it was "new old stock" or what. Since it failed during measurements there was obviously something wrong but we don't know whether the failure and the poor measurements are related or not.

@mdconnelly - I don't have a problem with him publishing before any verification or validation of any kind. Stereophile publishes its reviews without independent validation or verification as does every other magazine and website doing reviews. What I think is improper is publication without giving Devialet a chance to respond to his query. If you contact the manufacturer and ask for advice/assistance during a review process then I believe it is proper to delay publication of anything until a response has been received and to quote the response along with your findings. Amir doesn't do that.

As for whether or not Amir listened to it, my feeling from his review of the EtherREGEN was that he measures first and then listens so the failure of the amp probably ended any chance of a listening test. I don't think that approach is good practice. If you're familiar with Stereophile's, and most magazine tests, the measurements are usually made by someone other than the reviewer and the reviewer is not aware of the measurement results. In Stereophile reviews where John Atkinson is both reviewer and measurer, the listening test is done first and measurements later so Atkinson is not aware of the measurements during his listening tests in order that knowledge of the measurements does not bias his listening impressions.

I have strongly criticised Amir's review of the EtherREGEN elsewhere here on Devialet Chat, especially in relation to what I believe was his drawing of conclusions which could legitimately be drawn from the measurements, and I feel that he has done this again in this review. We have no way of knowing whether the amp was faulty when new or whether he was reviewing a used amplifier which had developed a fault due to damage caused by improper use by a prior user and, given the fact that the amp is a model which has now been discontinued for some years, that is certainly a possibility. The fact that he gave no information regarding the source of the amp, whether it had been previously used, and his publication before giving Devialet a chance to respond so that he could include their response in the review, render this review highly unreliable in my opinion. The amp may have been unused and it may have been faulty when it left the factory but we have no way of knowing and that is highly relevant information which should be clearly provided in the review. The failure to provide that information is unforgivable.

While I criticised his EtherREGEN review, Amir did state the source of the ER he tested, a loan from one of his readers. He hasn't provided that information here, it's highly relevant to our assessment of the results of his measurement, and readers should be provided with all of the relevant information the reviewer has which could affect their findings.

[thumb5]

@David A - excellent post. I've just abandoned the post I was in the middle of writing as you've covered it all very clearly. Thanks.

[mdconnelly]

@David A - Agree completely. I will say that on several occasions over the many years of reading Stereophile, I have seen them reach out to the manufacturer when testing detected significant abnormalities. I have also known them to retest on a separately provided piece of gear supplied by the manufacturer when such unexplained issues arise. In other words, Stereophile's methodology is thorough, beyond reproach, and performed in the interest of both readers and manufacturers.

IMHO, Amir/ASR holds little credibility, yet has somehow attracted a strong following. The truly unfortunate outcome from such reviews is that manufacturers get clobbered and customers miss out on significantly good products.

IMHO....

-- if the D200 he tested was already faulty, that could certainly explain the strange results he found and likely explain why the unit failed.
-- if the D200 was good at the start of the testing, then his aberrant test results and ultimate failure of the unit could be explained through gross negligence in his testing.

In truth, we have no idea, but having owned a D200 as many of the folks here have, I'm far more likely to believe either of these two alternate possibilities before I would ever believe that the D200 was as poorly designed as he suggests.