What's your process for comparing new gear, cables, etc.?

mijostyn, trust me, I've seen your skepticism here many of times, and it means nothing to me. When I work with sets of cables weekly, no skeptic's opinion matters. I can tune rigs with just one or two power cords. I regularly, at least a couple times each month, change systems entirely using cables. So, does your, or any other skeptic's opinion matter to me? No, not in the least.

Further, I put my ears and the cables to the test in my review of the Audio by Van Alstine ABX Comparator, and I did far better than 50% at selection of cables. So, I also have ABX experience that confirms what I'm hearing. It confirmed what is obvious to people who bother to actually work with cables.

I find chintzy people cover their chintziness by trying to cast aspersion upon others who use expensive cables. Maybe that doesn't fit you; maybe it does. Do I really care? No. :)

For me it is relatively easy.  I'm usually considering replacing one component at a time.  I've been fortunate that I have established positive relationships with a few great dealers over the years and they would let me take home equipment for a week or so to listen in my own home.  Of course they would take my credit card information down just in case I didn't return it (never) or if I decided to purchase, so I didn't have to come back down to San Diego. 

Then, I would establish the listening level using my measuring equipmtn and my many Stereophile test cds.  Then, listen to my favorite music on the existing system at the level I'm used to, match levels for the new piece I'm  auditioning and listen again to the same music.  Then, I would go back and forth to determine what equipment sounds like vs  the original piece.

differences in loudness/volume levels can make a false impression, which is why matching levels to listen matters greatly.

Another thing that is really important is to resist the urge to change more than one piece at a time while doing your tests.  it is impossible to know what exactly is making the change if you change more than one piece at a time.

Listening in a store is totally different. Yes, you may hear differences in your favorite music, however, there is no way you can tell what piece(s) are making that change, and if you purchase and get it home and it doesn't perform as well as you heard in the store, you get frustrated or angry.

A/B comparing equipment in your home on your existing system can be not only fun, but revealing.  Even A/B comparing equipment in stores, swapping only one piece can reveal much also.  this is exactly why certain manufacturers do not allow their products to be compared with other products in stores.  

I hope this helps.

enjoy and stay safe,

Great music even poorly recorded should move ya, but the stuff mixed and neutered for AM radio in cars is a PITA... the Joe Jackson remasters on Intervention Records ( Shane the founder and an acquaintance knows his way round good sound as a veteran of both Audioquest and Vandersteen) are really fantastic and IMO warrant purchase. I am an advocate for tone controls and more ( stereo/mono blend, phase, etc 
see Cello Pallete preamp for an idea and this is also a value added feature of Mc preamps... again if it done right ) to tweak a marginal recording

have fun

@mijostyn — got you. So…there's "good kabuki" and "crappy kabuki". I want to do "good kabuki"!
Will look into Psychoacoustics
@tvad  -- Your advice is sound. I'm just looking to make conversation that will (as you say) become really operative in the future. And, nope, I don't have the speakers yet. Everything is shut down in MI and Salk's timeline for production is already a multi-month deal. He has 1/2 my deposit, so I hope it moves forward quickly after things get going again.

@kren0006 -- I have a Rel R-328 sub. Ever see them used? I bought mine used but want another, without paying full price.

@minorl Your advice is good and sensible. What I'm seeking are ways of implementing criteria for how things sound beyond line level matching. If one looks at Harley's book, you can see various ways of describing treble, midrange, bass, soundstage, etc. There's a fairly precise vocabulary that reviewers use. But it's a complicated array of terms and a bit cumbersome to establish and then keep in mind. Especially with the issues raised by auditory memory. I realize that my ambition will seem overblown to most people -- they're content to equalize out the factors you mention, eliminate big variables, etc. I'm seeking to (a) create a workable set of perceptual criteria, conjoined with (b) an apt set of useful descriptive terms, so that I can (c) try to overcome the adverse effects of time lag between comparisons. Anyone not on an audio forum would have run away from me by now, so I'm grateful that some here are willing to inquire or trade stories about what they did.

@tommic601 Thanks for those suggestions — I'll take a look.

Not sure how helpful this will be but it's something to play with to test yourself.

http://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com/