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

Evaluation of the quality of a design is important....

But there is many design quatitative product, and yet a great varieties of acoustic implementation...

Recreating with the original acoustic digitalized or analog information conveyed by the gear system a relatively truthful representation or translation  of this information in a room acoustic is the real problem...

Buying relatively good gear nowadays is easier than in the past...

I believe that this move would please you very much.  Go for it. If I were to make a change

I want to listen first, not just make a change.

I am pretty much done with belief.
(I am not an amp designer, and AFAIK neither are you.)

( Primarily to reduce box count but retain superb sound quality) it'd be either Aries Cerat Genus or the Viva Solista. Both are what I believe to be excellent SET integrated amplifiers. 

I would like to see some meaningful measurements on those amps, rather than go solely by belief.

@holmz

I would like to see some meaningful measurements on those amps, rather than go solely by belief.

Go solely by belief? What are you talking about?

I have bee very clear with my comments on this thread that I value the listening experience far more than a reliance on test acquired measurements. You seem to have taken a counter position (As you questioned some of my  'supportive stance of listening' replies in this thread). Frankly I’m not sure what exactly is the point you’re trying to make. Your last post is strange. Anyway as I’ve previously stated, just do what works best for you.

Charles

You can take several examples of audio components that are capable of performing this unaltered waveform function. Yet when listened to, it’s clearly recognized that each of them have their own sonic signature or fingerprints.

This is impossible with a proper measurement set.

If they measure so close, I personally would not trust user listening tests unless they don't know what they are listening to. The potential to fool ourselves is too high.

 

I have bee very clear with my comments on this thread that I value the listening experience far more than a reliance on test acquired measurements. You seem to have taken a counter position (As you questioned some of my ’supportive stance of listening’ replies in this thread). Frankly I’m not sure what exactly is the point you’re trying to make. Your last post is strange. Anyway as I’ve previously stated, just do what works best for you.

Charles

I suppose to find top shelf amps we have:

1. Cost
2. Looks
3. Features
4. Measured performance

I am trying to figure out how those amps that I have not heard of might be evaluated objectively in a 4,3,2,1 fashion… rather than in a 1,2,3 fashion?

Basically while you favour listening, I need to sort through the bevy of choices to get to a small enough list, so that I can then search for what might be close by. Then I can listen.
If you have all those amps close by, then it does seem easier or you to just listen.
(Plus you seem to totally discount measurements… so #4 is off your list.)

Frankly I’m not sure what exactly is the point you’re trying to make.

The other point is that Ralph’s description of what matters seemed to be dismissed out of hand. The more I read that measurements don’t matter, the more it makes me want to question whether the expert opinions from amp designers have merit.
Hence I bring it up.