The Audio Science Review (ASR) approach to reviewing wines.

If you ship a non-traditional item to ASR for review, no matter how good. Amir will absolutely destroy that product in his measurements. This I can guarantee you.

He absolutely obliterated, massacred the Chord Dave he reviewed. There is no shortage of great and beloved products that he had destroyed with his reviews. But strangely no products he endorsed are beloved.

I read ASR, but don't agree with the attitude that measurements are all you need.  My biggest problem are the members who can ONLY see the audio world through their own narrow vision.  Every time someone seeks advice, it's the same routine of "it doesn't matter," rather than having any REAL input/advice.

What I DO value it for is the measurements (sans "recommendations") because MANY internet reviews these days ONLY speak about sound with no hard measurements - the exact opposite - and where I do believe sound is the ultimate arbiter, I feel modern equipment should at least measure reasonably.

“My biggest problem are the members who can ONLY see the audio world through their own narrow vision.  Every time someone seeks advice, it's the same routine of "it doesn't matter," rather than having any REAL input/advice.

What I DO value it for is the measurements…”

@wtyamamoto - Well said. The enormous chasm between the ASR faithful on one side,

• i.e., routinely displayed disdain and skepticism for expensive gear and those who own expensive gear, intolerance and frequent pile-ons when something doesn’t measure as well as a Topping, Gustard, etc., and banishment of those with dissenting viewpoints,

and the listening-over-measurements crowd,

• i.e., everything can’t be measured, human hearing is more advanced than any current measurement equipment, the wrong things are being measured, science cannot explain everything in the wide universe, etc.

has created a sort of ASR Derangement Syndrome where the mere mention of ASR results in a basic war of words.  It seems the delivery style by the ASR members and, in some cases Amir himself, could be a bit more insightful and understanding of other viewpoints, while the listen-only crowd might open their minds to the possibility that occasionally, certain sacred cows aren’t worth defending.  There is probably room for compromise on both sides.

I find ASR a refreshing, fact-based antidote to the florid nonsense hyperbole in traditional audio reviews.

Take Fremer who argued in a TT review in TAS last year that one arc second is audible with respect to wow&flutter. That is physics nonsense*. And the editor didn't catch that either. So I cancelled my TAS subscription again.

I also appreciate Amir's firm grasp of engineering, for instance that a USB reclocker is pointless (one of the latest videos). Plus emphasis of psychoacoustics, e.g. second one is better, as demonstrated by listening test of the USB reclocker, where it sounded better after the $4K reclocker was taken out. Plus the emphasis that objective testing of subjective listening test IS possible.

* for those who don't see it immediately, one arc second is an angular measurement, whereas speed stability if expressed as change of velocity over time (dv/dt). Even as a marine biologist I notice this. For fun, one can calculate the acceleration required to make audible changes in speed over 1 arc second, taking threshold of hearing for frequency (~2–3¢ on a good day) and time changes into account, and then it becomes even more ridiculous.

This is indeed a false dilemma. Telling me I like something because it measures well makes little sense...but telling me that measuring something has no place in a selection process is equally senseless. These are just data points.

On the OP's analogy, there is science and engineering behind 99% of product development and manufacturing these days.  That includes wine. 

My negative thoughts on ASR relate mostly to his lack of tact (see how nasty his debates got on the Roon forum) and how that fosters ASR culture, and the absolutely dogmatic nature of how they interpret the results relative to the probability that something will sound better to the majority. Because that’s really all it is...probability...because of the number of factors not considered (which would be impossible to consider given that many of the factors don’t exist in Amir’s lab...i.e. the listener and the listener’s room and other gear).

A few random observations about this debate:

• I suggest that assembling a good system is as much about the assembling as it in any individual piece of gear. The synergy is key...much of this is scientific/electrical in matching output/input properties and the like. Then there is the room and the source material. Some of these variables are impossible to keep constant. Probability, not certainty there.
• ASR mostly ignores the synergies and relationships. I imagine this makes more sense to headphone users where variables can be greatly reduced. My buddy who is an ASR cultist is a cans guy and his POV makes more sense in that context.
• ASR provides an invaluable service in debunking total snake oil, and there is a lot of it, especially now on the digital and network side. But their 150% dismissive attitude actually robs it of the credibility it otherwise deserves.
• That Panther junk is dumb...people should have to have listened to the gear to vote.

Thanks for an entertaining Saturday morning folks!