Interesting thread. A few observations.
First, regarding nyev's "debate" with noske. Thanks, noske, for that bit of science history, but nyev's point is not thereby invalidated. Certainly, before Bell's discovery in 1880, science would have rejected testimonials of perceived sounds associated with meteors for the reason nyev points out. And that's enough to provide a compelling instance of the maxim that "not everything you can hear can be measured." noske's original post was not intended as a lesson in the history of science, but as a provocative instance of an experienced phenomenon that was not (at one time) explainable by "science."
FWIW, here's another example of that sort of cautionary tale. Before scientists discovered (at the turn of the 20th century) the neural receptors for a taste now known as "umami," it was believed that all taste was analyzable into sweet, sour, salty and bitter. Does that mean no one tasted "umami" before the 20th century? Of course not.
But the other side of this controversy also has merit. Audio equipment is, after all, designed by engineers with educations in the relevant sciences. Audio components are devices that are designed according to the same scientific "facts" that ASR purports to measure; they're not naturally occurring phenomena. (By the way: when nyev writes "phenomena" [plural], he means "phenomenon" [singular].)
But, for reasons that are not well understood, the representation of sound is not always best served by "accuracy." A recent discussion on this forum of Nelson Pass's "harmonic distortion generator" is relevant here. Pass set out to introduce into solid state amplification some of the "artifacts" (that is, distortion) that many audiophiles describe as the "warmth" of tube sound. Obviously, Amir at ASR would pan any amplifier that measured in such a way. But many listeners prefer the sound. Who knows why?
I'm convinced that we audiophiles too often overlook the vagaries of subjectivity—just as oenophiles often do when judging wines. On some occasions, one's state of being (whatever that means) is just better suited to appreciating music (or wine) than on others. A couple of days ago, an audiophile friend brought over his $5,000 PS Audio power "regenerator," something Amir has debunked as bogus on ASR. My friend swears by it. And I have to say, although I could NOT discern a difference in the sound of a given track with this device in or out of my system, he left it with me for the night—and I just couldn't stop listening to music. The music really "engaged" my attention, and I didn't want to do anything else. Was that because of the device? Frankly, I doubt it. Getting involved in the music is not such a rare delight. But it is rare enough that I had a great time that evening; listening not to the system, but to the music is what this hobby is all about. Even if this is a placebo effect, I do want more of it.