Why do many discussions about sonic performance disintegrate into technical discusions?

OP, as you have suggested at the end of the day, first is sonic performance, being the most important. Stability and functionality is second but perhaps can be equal first. How it is made is absolutely third to sonic performance and although can be sometimes interesting.

As regards technology being based on data, that is actually generally not true inasmuch as the only data is about technical performance when what is needed is data about the listener's reactions.  As well, technical innovations are often confounded by other changes in a product such that even if everyone agrees that a new product is better you can't actually say why. 

Audio is about technology but the discussions of the technical advances almost always have less merit than the authors believe because they lack evidence that the supposed technical advantage of, say a new amplifier circuit, is what really makes the new amp, which employs it, actually sound better. Almost always with new products, the new technological innovation is confounded with other changes in the product. For example higher grade components, such as capacitors, resisters, volume controls, transformers. Or in a topic near and dear to my heart, additional mechanical damping. What is usually missing is a controlled comparison where two amps are compared with only one variable changing, such as the circuit.

So talking technology generally creates a false impression of scientific exactitude. And to be clear, I am not just talking about amplifiers.

I am with Geoffkait. These threads sound like something Woody Allen wrote. The male male egos here can't even agree on the definition of technical.

mapman14,
It’s the technology that makes the sound.

Capisce?

+1

So what you like the discussion to disintegrate into??