Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

@mahgister 

The name of his company is "temporal coherence"... After all that he propose his finished product to a general listening tests among potential customers or reviewers...

Again, as do every other manufacturer of audio gear.  Where is the proof that he has figured out the secret in musicality that measurements don't show?  Offering ear to customers and reviewers is not that.  He needs to demonstrate with listening tests that his claims are correct.  

@mahgister 

As i said above Van Maanen use real musical signals not artificial tone as you repeat erroneously many times... Consult the article..

I have read every word of that article, multiple times.  There is no mention of any such musical signals.  Nor proof point that they are revealing as such.

The only signal he shows is a disjointed sine wave:

The input signal is in blue.  Does that look like music to you or a test signal?  Answer is the latter, yes?  In his very own simulation he shows the value and power of using simple test signals.

@mahgister First you state this:I beg your pardon but all my posts which are a rational discussion with Amir were not about subjectivits and objectivists, which is a MEANINGLESS debate let to itself most of the times;

Then you say this:But on this thread it is not at all what all is about... Here it is about objectivist versus subjectivist...

Sometimes it pays to remember what you previously post in reply to other members--IMHO.

@mahgister 

Van Maanen said explictly that he use real MUSIC signals not artificial tones or continuous sine wave to test his design and measure their behaviour under stress ....And he described in his articles how he designed his own amplifiers... He is not in the job of comparing amplifiers as you did with some set of linear measures... 

Oh yes he is.  See his other paper here: https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/DynamicResponseAmplifiers.pdf

Title: "Tone burst response of amplifiers to determine some properties of their dynamic behaviour"

Then he says this:

"To that end, two high-quality amplifiers with clear differences in their perceived sound, have been tested with tone-bursts. In this report, only the results at 30 Hz will be reported and discussed, as at these low frequencies the issues show more clearly."

See?  Not only does he use classic test tones, but says it "clearly" shows the difference between the two amplifiers.  Here is one of his graphs for the first amplifier:

Please explain to me why it is OK for him to run such tests when you claim any such test is based on "fourier theory" and therefore invalid.  I remind you that this is your expert witness.

@mahgister 

In a word we must train and trust our ears... Measuring is not enough...

Do you agree if such a test doesn't exist, or that it used more than the ears, the claims are invalid?