Audio Science Review = "The better the measurement, the better the sound" philosophy

I don’t now why there should be such an insistence put on tests, charts and measurements when expressing an opinion about audio equipment on Audiogon. This website is comprised mainly of hobbyist who can listen seriously and verbally communicate what they hear, as a means of discourse with others who are doing the same. Sure, there are likely plenty of members who understand the science behind what ASR is doing (but may still disagree with their conclusions). But there are members who are more like myself. Those who have studied harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, arranging, conducting and music history to a certain degree. Who grew up playing an instrument and joined a band in their adolescence. Who attend concerts and recitals whenever possible. These types of personal life experiences are why I comprehend a listening review more than the triangulating of frequencies and mathematical charts. I’ve built sound waves and used charts to incorporate percussion rate, fall rate, attack rate, etc.. before interfacing them with an electronic polyphonic keyboard, so I know a little but my listening preferences are primarily based on what I hear, or what someone else describes hearing.

My father used to build cars before he got a job building aircraft engines. He can explain every part in a car and evaluate whether or not there’s a better or more economical way of engineering it. Today, people like him are usually involved in research. But despite his knowledge, he has terrible taste in cars and I don’t need to know what he knows to choose a better car than he would. Also, he’s always been a pretty bad driver. This of course may not be the best analogy but I’ve personally developed a way of evaluating based on listening reviews relevant to both equipment and recordings. And regardless of what I find in online publications, the best way for me to audition audio equipment is to actually hear it. I’d make the radical assumption that most people who are involved in this hobby can make sound purchasing decisions based on listening evaluations.

ASR reviewed the Benchmark AHB2 power amp and gave it a huge recommendation because it was the best measuring amp they had tested.

Chris Bryant in Hi Fi Critic also reviewed and measured it and although it measured very well gave it a very low rating for sound quality.He said-"For me,when variations in timing patterns or rhythmic drumming are encountered,the musical flow is compromised." and "but it failed to impress in terms of musical involvement,attaining an overall score of just 45 points’.

A lot people[naive objectivists]I guess] bought those amps based on the ASR review and if you follow posts about that amplifier in this forum and others you will see a lot of people saying they bought it but sold it later because it was extremely boring sounding.Some others say they like it but my take on that is they are probably listeners who do not hear timing and rhythm patterns very well so have not, nor may not ever ,become aware of what is not right about it.Even many who have moved on were probably not fully aware of the exact nature of what is wrong but knew something was not right.

This is where subjective reviews by experienced reviewers like Chris Bryant become invaluable and should be taken into consideration by any buyer.

Ok, so I am really trying to keep up here. Apparently, an amplifier measured well on the test-bench and was well-reviewed by one reviewer while a second reviewer reported that although the amp “measured very well,” it just wasn’t his cup of tea.

Based on that information, you concluded that the people who still own and use the well-measuring amp are obviously “naive objectivists” with poor hearing, while those who have moved on did so because the subjective review of the experienced second reviewer is “invaluable” and should be "taken into consideration by any buyer" of this amp.

Simply brilliant!

Not what I meant at all.What I meant was that some people would have bought that amp based on the ASR review without listening to it  [ASR didn't either] and if they had listened some of them probably would have made a different choice.So in that context yes they are naive objectivists for thinking that good measurements will automatically correlate with what sounds good to them.

Here is an ASR member's preferred music and equipment when responding to me two weeks ago (I saved it because I don't think I like any of his music choices except reggae).  

Via PC and APO EQ - Topping DX 3 Pro+ => Yamaha A-S 301 => Wharfedale 12.2 + REL 1003 (REW EQ) On me head: AKG K702, AKG K371, Fostex T20 RP, Sennheiser HD 650

Genres: hip-hop, reggae, ska, punk, alternative rock, trash metal, industrial, 90s techno, progressive techno, dnb, narco corridos, cumbia 

Are these music genres adequate to evaluate audio equipment?   I mentioned that jazz could be more appropriate (I didn't mention classical music or classic rock and pop).  I was scolded for mentioning it.