Nearly all manufacturers do not advertise/exhibit their product measurements? Why?

holmz

As for checking out virtual systems there is a text box beneath each one with a link "read more" which expands it. The links I mentioned are embedded in the description of my system.

The FR is impressive.

Were there any time domain measurement like impulse or step function response? 

I have been running through my preamp options here ranging from purely passive, to a high quality op-amp active stage, to a tube active stage with NOS Amperex (Holland), to a well-regarded unity gain solid state model. The preamp has been sort of a sticking point for me over the years and I have owned around 20 highly regarded (by reviewers) preamps, both tubed and solid state, and at varying price points up to and in a couple of cases exceeding $10K.

The recent comments here about the Benchmark LA4, caused me to reconsider that unit that I was previously interested in but for whatever reason never pursued. Based on all the "professional" reviews, as well as user/owner comments here and at Audio Asylum, it seems the LA4 measures superbly, and drives whatever signal is provided accurately, clearly, and without embellishment. Theoretically, that should work great for me since my front end (streamer/server and DAC) is known for being full-bodied and tonally dense, and my amplification is known for being musical - IOW, I do not need a preamp to add anything to the mix but only to provide a display, a remote, and to stay out of the way sonically.

The only negative I read from a minority of the reviewers is that in some systems they did not perceive the same level of body that they heard with other preamps, and particularly tubed preamps. A couple of people thought the Benchmark made their systems sound a little thin. Of course, Benchmark indicates this is likely because of improved timing and the absence of distortion (and the measurements support that assessment).

In summary, the excellent measurements (and reviews) resulted in my purchasing the unit but how it sounds with my gear, and compared to my existing preamp options, will be the deciding factor on whether I keep it. If it causes my system to sound thin, then I will not be keeping it since I have several other preamp options that sound really good.

@fleschler 

@westcoastaudiophile I don’t know of any high end/expensive/boutique cable manufacturers who provide testing measurements of their cables.

Iconoclast does. They have extensive specifications/measurements. Alas, none of that resulted in better/different sound:

@holmz +1 - time domain response has significant SQ impact.it also has to include small signal steps, scaling to max power level to check dynamics. 

@westcoastaudiophile 

@amir_asr "Do you really think we don’t listen to music?”using your own jargon, what “irks" me is a claim as you are able to distinguish in your listening tests between 0.001% and 0.005% THD sources, employing ~5% HD speakers, and unknown real load HD amp.

I haven't said that so it shouldn't irk you.  What should make you upset is folks paying orders of magnitude more, only to get a less performant audio device. 

Many people here say as actual "A” SQ quality is better than “B”, even if setup “B” includes lil better measured standalone component, assuming integrated system performance. 

That's not remotely what they say.  They say they buy gear based on what they "hear."  They completely ignore measurements.  All they have to do is demonstrate that they only used their ears and we will be pals.  But they refuse to close their eyes and provide no other means to connect the experience to only what they hear.