If measurments are not science but only a standard for determining quality assurance, shouldn't that mean the Chinese audio gear that measures leaps and bounds ahead of other well-known brand is "better quality?"
OP:
Not what I meant to say at all. I meant to say that the process of measurement alone is not enough to call something "science." Measuring and comparing to other measurements, alone, is not science. Science grows by research and investigation. All of the measurements in Stereophile are not, by themselves, science. We can say that the measurements are artifact of prior science. I think the process is closer to quality assurance than science.
If I take my multi-meter and stick it in my wall, it it science? No, it's testing based on established norms (110 Volts to 129 Volts is good). That's what I mean by quality assurance. It is a rote task based on well established standards and repetition.
Clearly, my multimeter, and the delivery of alternating current to my home is the result of many scientific activities which have ultimately resulted in a set of products and practices which ultimately end in an outlet in my wall, and a multimeter with an LCD display telling me the voltage, but am I performing science? I don't really think so. The same thing is true for using old audio measurements.
We should also be careful in using "quality" here. When manufacturing we may establish a minimum S/N ratio of 100 dB. If a part comes off the assembly line with less we send it to the repair team. Otherwise we ship it. That's not the same use of saying a product is more desirable or less desirable for me based on this number.