From someone who tested (using a Klippel for quite some time) and posted this data for everyone to see on my now-defunct website medleysmusings.com, here are my takes:
1) When you're starting off, it's easy to be enraptured with the new toy. It's easy to take things personally. Years away and experience showed me that in my early days, those who I viewed as being combative were (mostly) trying to help and/or curious of certain "inaccuracies" themselves.
2) No matter what is said to/from this is what I am seeing: a bit of an ego because you have the Klippel... and the Klippel doesn't lie. I was that same person for quite some time. I fully admit it. It took me a few months to get over myself. I believe this whole ordeal is no different... I think cooler heads will prevail and time will lead to the same result that I ultimately came up with in #1 above.
3) The purpose of the NFS is to offer the user automation. That's where the cost really lies. Heck, just a standard loudpseaker turntable and CLIO costs upwards of $5k. Numerous software (as well as Klippel) also offer the ability to conduct intelligent nearfield/farfield splicing based on the DUTs effective diameter. But the big benefit of the NFS to me is the wholly automated way of performing the measurement and obtaining the results that would otherwise take hours of manually adjusting. I know. I did this for years myself. I would legitimately spend a good 8 hours to test a single drive unit: from build up, set up, record, analyze, report findings and tear down. The ability to automate the testing to a high degree of accuracy and repeatability is ... well, a god send, to be blunt.
4) With 3 above, and with the desire of this site to be so focused on objective data, I don't understand why re-testing the DUT at the manufacturer specified listening axis isn't performed. First, that's how the 2034 spec says to do it. Second, it's honestly just a no-brainer. Thirdly, if the test is called in to question legitimately then the thread should be updated with the new test results. Or at the very least a huge disclaimer with the points made here should be posted. Still, I've learned that people see graphs and run. They don't take time to read discussion the majority of the time. And unfortunately, as we will see in the future if this thing continues to happen, the internet will be filled with incorrect assumptions about data captured in a non-idealized way. Pages and pages of arguments could have been saved. But, if I'm being honest, I think this has more to do with #2 above.
5) Blitz testing should be avoided at first. I get it. It's a new toy. You want to test a bunch of stuff. But that leads to errors as we are seeing discussed here. At least in the early stages it should be: Perform a test. Post the data. Wait for some feedback. Learn from both it and the viewership's feedback. Implement necessary changes (some of which I believe have been implemented, like the SPL adjustment). And then go forward. Throwing a bunch of data out without taking time to consider what it means leads us to where we are now. I've already seen others on another forum now question the accuracy of this site's testing thanks to this very thread. Think about that for a second. One mis-step and one acknowledgement of said mis-step will now lead to less trust. That's a shame. Truly.
Argue with me if you want. I can point to pages and pages of me going through the EXACT same thing when I first started testing with the Klippel (LSI/LPM, TRF/DIS to be more concise). I've been in the exact same shoes as Amir. And I am the only other person I know of who has used the Klippel to provide data for all. So, I can speak from literal experience on this matter. I made the same mistakes... from letting my ego get in the way by thinking that if I were the owner of said machine then how could anyone question my expertise to not taking time to step back and review what I'm doing. I realize the NFS was a costly undertaking. I know this full well. I hope he can take the time to step back and see that my reply here comes from a place of hope. Hope that he will remember to breathe and evaluate not only his community's concern but also evaluate what his goal is: to provide a lot of data... or provide the most accurate data he can. And I hope you all who seem to be going at this in a spiteful way will try to step back yourselves and ask how you can help the community (not just yourself or not just Amir) learn from this event.
- Erin