What are we objectivists missing?

After treading through the various forum posts re cables for the various uses we apply them to, be it amp>speakers, source>pre, pre>amp, et all.....

It still seems to me that the 'better' one's equipment is, or is in one's perception of what is played in the environment that it is done in...

...that what one experiences is a very subtle form of eq.

One may purport that cable Q is superior in their instance, while for others they stink in relation to cable R...or F...or whatever.

Granted, I've not had the pleasure to experience personally such gratifications beyond the occasional 'listening sesh'...in an entirely different space with equipment I've no personal experience with to any great degree.

In short: If your boat floats better, have at it.  Tell us about it; those who can indulge obviously may do so to whatever degree desired.

I've not heard every conceivable combination of equipment in one space that would allow for a critical opinion that would hold up under any and all scrutiny.

Not likely to, either.  So it comes down to pleasing oneself to whatever level one desires to take it to.

If one wants to regard me as a nasty narrow-minded jade...I'm good with that.

Been called worse...mostly on the highway, when a Focus keeps showing up in front of your Porsche in the other lane you didn't take.... ;)

On two different occasions, I've read articles by a very famous audiophile who claims LPs sound better than cds, who said something along the lines of, "I really liked how this xxx sounded but I haven't seen the measurements yet so I could have egg on my face." If you like how it sounds, measurements don't matter, but don't try and convince me that it's better than something else.

I figure subjectivists are like religious people and objectivists are the scientists. There is no proof that a new cable, silver fuse, etc improves the sound, but they believe it does As @djones51 said, until you take vision out of any audio testing, there's going to be bias.

"The most reliable method is to listen."

@ghdprentice ​​​@jtucker 

The most reliable method is to listen.    BLIND.  Repeated ABX testing is required.  A consistent score of 95% or better indicates a valid distinction.  All else is entirely invalid.  PERIOD.

Blind listening proves if there is a change or not.  Measurements are unnecessary - we are listening, not measuring.  That removes any suggestion measurements do not measure everything.

@henry53 

"The product measured 0.003% distortion. You cannot hear 0.003% distortion. The same pages waxes lyrical about a turntable that has 0.06% wow and flutter, that's 200 times higher?"

Back to math juniors Henry.  That's 20 times higher.  I note you put a question mark, so perhaps you weren't sure.