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

There must be some kind of way out of here...

The way out is a dialogue out of the narrow mind set of few fetichist subjective people and also especially out of the objective obsession about electrical measures of few zealots, in a discussion appealing to more rigorous acoustic and psycho-acoustic concept and experience and experiments... After all the correlation between objective and subjective attitude must be a learned experience in an ongoing process in an experimental listening  history proper to each of us...

Then calling people "deluded audiophile" or throwing appeal to ban objectivist is not a sane mental behaviour...

Seem to me that if a product measure worse in a parameter than another its objectively worse based on that parameter.

But as I suggested before if one posits a given level of distortion is inaudible 

reducing that level of distortion a hundredfold cannot affect the audible experience

The measurement it important from the marketing and quality control standpoint of course.

To suggest a piece that measures worse cant sound good isnt sustainable after a minimum standard is met,

If you cd establish  level of distortion that is audible that might be helpful but wdnt necessarily mean the piece wd not sound  good

You wd need to be able to prove that an audible level of distortion was detectable to a large number of folk who wd independently agree it sounded bad to make the point 

And then you are back to listening test vs measurement no?

@mahgister ​​​​​@deludedaudiophile  OP here. Let's give some others a chance to chime in. You must have said everything that needs to be said by now. Thanx. 

Great post!

You are right but some dont understand what a "process" means...A process is a two way road between  O and S  perspectives... 

They want to reduce subjective experience to objective measures without being conscious that  psycho-acoustic is a progressive science which cannot be reduced to electronics...

Seem to me that if a product measure worse in a parameter than another its objectively worse based on that parameter.

But as I suggested before if one posits a given level of distortion is inaudible 

reducing that level of distortion a hundredfold cannot affect the audible experience

The measurement it important from the marketing and quality control standpoint of course.

To suggest a piece that measures worse cant sound good isnt sustainable after a minimum standard is met,

If you cd establish  level of distortion that is audible that might be helpful but wdnt necessarily mean the piece wd not sound  good

You wd need to be able to prove that an audible level of distortion was detectable to a large number of folk who wd independently agree it sounded bad to make the point 

And then you are back to listening test vs measurement no?

There's too much confusion, I can't get no relief...