I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.

But it is solely about measurements versus subjective.

So maybe it is because we cannot describe feelings and impressions and emotions as easily as we can express things with numbers… maybe that is why we use objective analysis?

At this point we have moved to beating a dead horse using AI and machine learning.
We should be at the glue stage soon.

Now two remarks here....

My feeling and impressions correspond and CORRELATE to ACOUSTIC experience and very well defined concept to describe sound experience: Imaging, soundstage, timbre, bass, LEV/ASW ratio, dynamic, etc all had a precise psycho-acoustic and acoustical definition and can be understood ONLY when we learn how to control them at will in a room if we are an audiophile or in a laboratory if we are an acoustician ...

Buying like a fetichist a piece of favorite brand name gear is not enough, and measuring like a zealot a second times this piece of gear to correct the designer and verify it, is not enough either... And arguing if we must measure OR listen is ridiculous...A dead horse alternatives...

Objective measures of any kind, electrical one or acoustical one, are there to serve our leaning hearing subjective experience and process and serve to improve our impressions by our own will to experiment with objective material dispositions ...

And you read me WRONG, i did not propose, nor any of the scientists i used in my posts,  to replace human mind by a machine to improve room acoustic... It is the opposite, i explicitly say that even if an A. I. will be better for many aspect of the job but not all, it will rob us of our own learning process.... Do you read posts or do you answer them without reading them?

Then interpretating me wrong, it is you who circle "beating your dead horse" alternatives : O or S....

I am not an O or a S... I am in the learning process...

I used to be surprised by such antics but that was long ago. It's silly to argue with those who employ ad hominem attacks, circular reasoning and other mental gymnastics, imo, unless you simply enjoy ill logic. For me that's just a waste of time.

For sure you are more wise than i am...

I am only a too much enthusiastic person....

my deepest respect to you....

In another thread, perhaps this thread, @prof clearly differentiates between subjective preferences and subjective impressions.  We are beating a dead horse, because we are ignoring the initial premise of the thread in some unusual, I would say bizarre special pleading that in the framework of the discussion is totally meaningless. It is self indulgent to even bring it up, and is brought up purely to advance a personal belief while ignoring relevance to the topic.

As has been stated too many times in this thread, and others just in the last few weeks. Almost no one doubt personal preference is not a thing and is not important. But as @prof eloquently stated, and I have in less eloquent fashion, that is not at all what we are ultimately discussing. We are discussing whether your personal impressions represent REAL changes in the sound that is being reproduced or are purely the result of the inconsistent nature of the brain to reach the same conclusion based on poor memory, and any number of other inputs including mood, visual inputs, other sensory inputs, etc. that are involved in processing the current environment and reaching an answer. As the weightings of those inputs are so variable over time, and memory so inexact, it is near impossible to reach objective conclusions based on subjective impressions. Hence why the insistence that subjective impressions can only be treated as objective conclusions, if, and only if, you make all attempts to isolate the inputs available in making the subjective impression. The so called blind testing's goal is to remove a variable from the outcome, namely our most critical sensory input, vision. This should be obvious to anyone who tries to compare to items. I won't insult you by saying we need to remove the variable of touch, and I hope you are not smelling or tasting your audio equipment, but the smell of a tube amplifier (from heat effects) if only evident while listening to it, could also impact a test.

I am sure someone will now post multiple paragraphs and multiple posts of unrelated self indulgent material that not only is unrelated but has no value in answering the question above, but I can only control my own actions.

You spoke in the context of a piece of gear evaluation opposing FIXATED subjective attitude and tastes to objective measures OBSESSION supposed to be able to describe sound ...For example evaluating a dac or an amplifier...

I spoke in the context of acoustic and psycho-acoustic experiments when subjective impressions and preference can be MODIFIED by a learning process in a progressively controlled room or in an acoustic laboratory...

Then i dont oppose subjective impressions to electrical measures and acoustic measures i CORRELATED THEM...

This is science...

Amir is a hobbyist verifying specs sheets so useful it is , it is no reason to dismiss a subjective listening learning process and negate any value to it compared to electrical measures...

All biases are not equal...

A positive acquired acoustical biases is not a mere negative biases, and none of these two is reducible to a mere deception or illusion...

Reality is more complex than children alternatives between objectivist and subjectivists... Sorry...

And we need a theory of hearing to undertstand any set of measures meaning...

You see i can control my post... 😁😊

We are discussing whether your personal impressions represent REAL changes in the sound that is being reproduced or are purely the result of the inconsistent nature of the brain to reach the same conclusion based on poor memory, and any number of other inputs including mood, visual inputs, other sensory inputs, etc. that are involved in processing the current environment and reaching an answer. As the weightings of those inputs are so variable over time, and memory so inexact, it is near impossible to reach objective conclusions based on subjective impressions.

It’s a stupid and useless debate to start with. People just creating a dilemma where there is none and using that to go off on whatever topic they happen to fancy. Lots of words that translate into chaos because people have to convince others they have some unique insight that others lack. I regret spending the time it took to read this going on about a non issue that adds no value to the quest for good sound. I did it because I like @mahgister’s open mind and often find his comments interesting. This one jumped the shark and missed the mark. Have fun. Cheers!