Why is science just a starting point and not an end point?

I’ve kind of covered this a few times recently.

What you are describing isn’t science, it is measurements and technology.

For it to be science it has to evolve, and help connect the measurements to perception or desirability.

Measuring distortion or frequency response is NOT science. It is 70 year old measurements.

You said it better than me thanks....

Some dont even know that this CORRELATION between physical acoustic and neurophysiology of perception is one of the most fundamental science for audio: psychoacoustic....

Some more narrow minded even wanted to reduce the study of perception to only pure technology....They wanted to erase consciousness from the perception "equation" and make it pure physical science.......

A.I. cultist.....

Test tones are a good indication if your component is capable of delivering the musical signal in its entirety so you can decide how it sounds.

To what end? If I am going to need to listen to the audio equipment to decide how it sounds, what possible value does the results obtained from test tones give me?

I'd rather not know how a musical component test lest it clouds my judgement. I may find a component that perform badly with test tones more musical. 

@petg60 “Nature itself is stronger than science, though with the later we try to comprehend the former. Most likely one of the reasons we create art is the necessity to complement science.”

I would put it a little differently. Nature is very complex and science is the tool to unravel it layer by layer. We work from the big close problems... Apple falls, Earth is round, coefficient of friction... layer by layer to more complex and detailed problems.. We are limited by time. The first stage of investigation of a new layer is observation and characterization with none mathematical prediction (try a bunch of different capacitors, see how each sounds). Draw broad generalizations... then test new stuff for conformance. It is this part we are doing to be successful with this pursuit.. It is just an earlier stage of science... like Darwin sailing around the world making observations and drawing preliminary conclusions. I think that is what I enjoy about it. I have learned enough to be able to navigate and buy the right components to get the sound I want with my own models mapped to my tastes.

@pauly “Why some "engineers" (roll eyes) on this forum think they know everything about human hearing and the measurement of sound and electricity is beyond me.”

Yes, I know. I have worked most of my career very closely with dozens and dozens electrical engineers from all over the country in high tech companies... amusingly that make components for high end audio...Burr-Brown Corp and Texas Instruments. I will say as a group they are pretty argumentative and egotistical (think they know it all)... also curious and very intelligent. But they have all read Jules Vernes’ Mysterious Island a couple times too many. Not all are closed minded to realizing they may not know it all... but as a group they are pretty ridged. These are the rolling eyes guys. They really have a hard time admitting they don’t know it all.

.

I have an old colleague that I worked with for 20 years that had written me suspiciously when I said I had an all tube system. He is coming down later this year... I will have him listen to my system and it will quickly convince him of my point of view... he is very open minded for an electrical engineer.