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

@rtorchia Most of the subjectivists here, like the OP, are pleased with the components they own and that is very good. You like what you hear which is all anyone can ask. So what ASR says about your stereo shouldn’t bother you. If I had some of these systems, all connected with the most expensive and exotic cables, I’d sit back and enjoy the music, and refrain from insulting Amir, ASR, and most of all science.

You are correct, what Amir says about my system doesn't bother me.  It is his defamatory twisting, out of context statements about me in this forum and his cohorts at ASR.   I didn't call him a fraud like so many at his site call so many high end companies/owners.   I do consult measurements when/where they are available and relevant.  I generally do not want a speaker that is difficult to drive if it has a combination of low efficiency and low impedance with high phase angles.  I don't want a speaker with a ragged frequency response.  I don't want an amp that has rapidly increasing distortion into easy loads (or anything above 3% THD).  There are so many other factors.  I am not a subjectivist or objectivist.   I will not purchase gear based on tests alone.  Just because I purchase gear only after auditioning it does not make me a subjectivist either.   

My next post will give you an indication of what I consider dubious (except I've actually heard/encountered most of these products).  

there are tons of threads on the subject, even stickied threads that are endless debates. 

@prof 

That alone gets my respect (not that I place any importance or value on my respect)

It is a rebuttal to anyone who says electrical engineers don't see a difference in power cables. 

No, it's another story of hearing differences in power cables without controlled blind listening tests. 

of course, blind listening tests being worth practically ~SQUAT~, as human hearing is a continual self controlled near unconscious moving target of a variable.

To make such testing (blind) valid, first we have to put human hearing in known quantified straight jacket of a box and call it nailed to the wall as a fact in eternity.

And we can’t. We can’t do that at all.

Blind listening testing regimen is a great idea!... but... if all the facts in it’s attempts in being a chain of logic are not in stable reliable definition, it turns to a giant steaming pile.

What they have found is that blind listening bits have to be limited to what, 5 minutes and then no more than an hour of this, and to then correlate that across many many groups of said listening to then come to a generalized conclusion?

HEY!..what do you know. That sounds a lot like the sighted listening tests of audiophiles who work at audio magazines and websites.

You know, that system many many hundreds of them developed across decades of work toward trying to get it done right.