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

Air, air, air. I have no idea what this guy means by more air, pumping air into a system. For a scientist, this sounds dumb.  What's in this guys' system-squipment unknown (insufficient air).

Lack of air can be noticeable where instruments and voices lack any ambiance which is recorded naturally (so many recordings use plate, digital or room reverb to simulate "air)." So, if a recording sounds flat, lacking in depth, dimensionality, and/or soundstage, it maybe lacking in "air."

My friend does not measure each cable. (Neither do most high end cable manufacturers). That is a flaw in his construction whereby there can be variances in each cable. However, after listening to multiple cables of the same make, I rarely heard any difference. The primary difference in power cables were the A/C plugs and IECs. Power cables are the least returned cable he manufactures (he said none).

…

However, after listening to multiple cables of the same make, I rarely heard any difference.

….

#metoo 😎

So, I don’t see how the video you posted would help a member test cables or other components.

I explained how you do that in the video.  Setup your system such that you don't know which cable is used (cover/hide it).  Then have a loved one randomly switch one cable for the other.  You keep score of which is which as does the person doing the switching for you.  Do this 10 times and see if you can correctly identify one cable at least 8 times.  Seeing how in sighted tests major fidelity changes are reported, then this process should back that up.  If not, then the sighted tests are faulty.

If you are unwilling or unable to do such tests, then my measurements and null tests are an excellent substitute.  In some cases I have actually provided the captured outputs of the system so you can use any ABX software tool to compare them.

So very easy to do when it comes to cables (or any other audio tweak) which is the topic of this thread.

A comment, or clarification: measurements are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. 

When building something it can be very useful to measure certain parameters, in order to quantify progress in design changes, especially changes that might be below the threshold of audibility. Or it might also be useful to measure in order to discern what quantitative measures correlate with listener preference. Keith Herron for example once told me he believed people were sensitive to as little as 1/4dB in a certain circuit. This is far too low a level for anyone to identify as being louder or pick that out as the reason, they simply preferred one over another and only Keith knew the reason.

The takeaway, what I got from it anyway, was three-fold:

First, his testing was double-blind. So there is a use case even for this so often abused method.

Second, measurements can be essential. It was only by rigorously measuring output that he knew what it was his test subjects were hearing, or more precisely choosing between.

And third and most crucially, the end goal was listener preference. Not the measurement. The experience. 

Say again, measurements are a means to an end. If you can keep this simple fact in mind any time you see anyone putting the cart before the horse, it can save you a whole lot of misery, wasted time, and money.

And now, at the risk of beating a now hopefully dead horse, I was not looking for a way of measuring cable vibrations to prove Cable Cradles work. Simply listen, it is obvious. I was looking for something that might help me figure out how to make them even better. There is always better. The proof is in the hearing. That is all.

@millercarbon I certainly agree with you but unfortunately, the highness of all things audio through measurement declares we are mislead, foolish and wasteful of our money.  A few others declared experts in mastering and sound reproduction as well as myself and friends as incompetent in discerning gross differences in sound and whether the sound is better or worse.  Hence, this site debunking the measurements uber all (well, primarily the ASR/Amir site) without the testing and measuring of the differences for audiophiles and music lovers.  If you read my previously posts, you'll know that I consider some measurements fundamental in matching equipment (speakers to amps, amps to pre-amps and cartridges to arms for example).  As to cables and tweaks, it becomes more of a listeners preference and not "snake oil."  Seasoned and expert listeners can easily discern better, worse and subtle/slight differences and each may have a preferential sound.  I have two friends with contrary opinions, one prefers and upfront, detailed (brighter) sound and another prefers a laid back, warm and fullsome sound.  Neither of them are wrong in their preference.  Neither of the approaches necessary denote that the equipment is faulty or measures significantly differently.  It's a combination of equipment in a system in a particular room/acoustics which determines the sound combined with the other elements such as power source, humidity, temperature, cabling and perhaps tweaks to create the sound the person prefers.  It is not easy to do.  That is why audio shows and audio salons strive to combine components which work together and present a unified sound, one type or another.