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

So one example is a scientific result?

Thought the net result had to be repeatable, verifiable. 

I can tell the difference in the 6 amplifiers I own and the speakers, blind tested and verified by my cat. 

There was a head phone amplifier reviewer on Youtube, somewhat respected, that claimed with 100% certainty he could tell two amplifiers apart. Someone challenged and he took up the challenge. I applaud his willingness to be public about the result. The result? In a blind test, he could not tell the amplifiers apart. Not at all.

I do not trust @crymeanaudioriver opinion(s).   ASR site is replete with anecdotes and foolish statements concerning cables, especially digital cables.    I've tried half a dozen digital cables and none of them sound the same, not even close.  I bet they measure the same though, 75 ohms, similar capacitance, resistance, inductance although I have no tests proving that other than a voltmeter.   I decided based on listening.   None of the cables had specs although five had extensive explanations concerning their construction.  

I am very interested in hearing Atma-Sphere GaNFET and AGD Productions GaNTube  amplifiers.  I've heard a few Class D amps that sounded very good at audio shows, better than many solid state A/B amps, especially high powered older SS.  I suspect they measure well even if they don't measure "perfect".  ASR hasn't measured an AGD amp (probably too expensive).   Both of my custom built tube amps sound better than the Atma-Sphere tube amps but the latter are very good (and very hot running).  Who knows, Atma-Sphere states that the new Class D amp sounds better than his tube amps.  I'd like to hear both his and AGD's.  

@henry53 admits that the ASR measurements provide enough resolution that they are beyond audible limits, but appears to be claiming they must make some other unknown test. For a cable, especially a digital cable, or power conditioner tested by measuring the whole system I can't imagine what that is.  The tests are extensive. I am not an engineer but it is obvious that all those complaining are not either.

Yes I am a forensic Engineer BSc(Hons) C.Eng. M.I.E.E M.I.Prod.E to be exact. A great portion of my career investigating accidents including being on a Royal Commission as a crown investigator in Australia on one of the most significant accidents ever to occur. As such I deal with evidence every day. As per above and continuously in this discussion I am quoted as saying things never said or even implied. In this instance regarding some "unknown" test. What I have said to concise and clear AMR frequently users totally useless data to draw even more useless conclusions.

That settles it. We’re going out for Australian Ice Cream!

Pine-Lime Splice for me...

So @henry53 , MIEE, industrial engineering. Quick perusal indicates very little in the way of electrical engineering in that study. Light on related physics as well. I should have been more clear, but it should have been obvious.  Obviously none of us are electrical engineers or close enough to speak with authority. I would have settle for a strongly related physics degree.  I expect my PhD/MD is as relevant, and significantly more relevant on the research side. Are we all happy now?

In this instance regarding some "unknown" test. What I have said to concise and clear AMR frequently users totally useless data to draw even more useless conclusions.

You have neither proven the uselessness of ASR testing, nor have you provided alternatives. A simple question for you @henry53 , if testing of a cable by ASR, say a simple interconnect, in a typical system (nothing their systems are not made of expensive components), reveals that by all the measurements they do, there is no change, and in both cases, everything tested is well below acceptable audible limits, do you believe that cable will have no audible impact? Yes or No?

You claim totally useless data. However I note in their testing:

Noise levels: Noise is relevant, audible, and can be distracting for some. At high volumes, even low noise levels, can audible.

THD:  @djones51 noted above they are now testing down to 2 ohms impedance, and a quickly check shows many different frequencies. Apparently it is full sweep from very low power to full power or low signal level to high signal level. Many audiophiles who like tubes claim they are more linear at low signal levels. This test should cover that concern adequately.

IMD: Reading their test protocol, this is done at 32 different frequencies. Do you not agree this would be a reasonable simulation of music?  Audiophiles often write that IMD is more important, or that higher harmonics of distortion are important. Would this test not reveal all of that quickly?

Jitter:  For DACs, jitter is injected on serial cables and how well the DAC rejects jitter is measured. Jitter is also measured for all the inputs. I could probably find a thousand comments on this forum alone about the importance of low jitter. Are you claiming it is not important?

AC Harmonics:  Using very very distorted AC on inputs to DACs and amps to measure the effects. I would find a similar 1000 comments on importance of AC power on this forum. Do you not agree?

Speakers?:  Far more tests than I have seen from any publication or website on speakers. When I read the discussions that follow, all of it seems not only relevant, but all of it can be translated into physical aspects of how the speaker will sound and how it may work out in your room.  Is this not all useful?

I keep pushing the limits of my knowledge responding, but I don't see others pushing themselves to learn more.  Your comment about useless data does not appear warranted.  I have also asked you, what critical data that defines how something sounds is missing since you feel all the data they collect now is useless. Can you not answer this question?