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

Amir says, "When it comes to non-linear distortions, audiophiles are notoriously poor at hearing those artifacts.  It is for this reason that even poor measuring gear is praised as sounding good."

Tsk Tsk, another generalization without supporting data- bad science.  Actually, everyone is poor at hearing non-linear distortions because they occur naturally around us and even in our heads, inside our ears to be specific.  That is one reason tube amps without negative feedback sound better but SS amps without negative feedback can sound good too but look worse on paper.  

I heard arguments once that IM distortion was more critical to a pleasing sound than THD,  IM distortion occurs inside our heads too.  

Thomas Edison used to have stage shows in the 1900's where he put his new phonograph on stage behind a thin curtain.  He had a live opera singer on stage as well.  He would have the audience guess if the singing was live or a recording.  Sold a lot of phonographs that way.  

seems like this whole thing is really just a left-brain vs right-brain debate. anecdotally, all the best sounding systems ive heard have been put together by people who cant be bothered with such a binary view of things. instead of either/or it’s both/and

Now the posters are going after OldHvyMec for suggesting/stating that equipment always Breaks-in and mostly because he had the audacity to state that cable also breaks-in/burns-in.

How DARE they actually put some critical thinking to those claims and ask for evidence! Why don’t the many members there with technical knowledge and experience with electronics just flat out accept whatever OldHvyMec claims, even if it contradicts their own experience and knowledge of technical theory? Some anonymous poster making dubious technical claims ought to trump all that and they should bypass any demands for evidence out of deference to this new poster!

How dare they!  So mean and irrational of them!

"What I hear is pointless, just as what you hear is pointless. We hear what we think we hear, what we want to hear, what we need to hear"

The way I read it, I don't see anything objectionable about that statement. You could substitute "hear" with "see" and it still resonates.

@djones51 Thank you