Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

Listening test says hey...these speakers sound what we feel is as close to the real as we have ever heard; measurements say they sound like mud with a dollop of distortion on top...who here is a buyer?? ....;0)

The problem is, you are short of any bias controlled listening tests that show this.  You keep saying that such exists, but can't even remotely demonstrate it.  As I said should be possible to at least create a contrived one but you don't even have that.

For our part, we have large library of tests that show the opposite of what you claim.  That good measurements often do predict better sound.  Take this Audio Engineering paper:

Some New Evidence That Teenagers May Prefer Accurate Sound Reproduction Sean E. Olive, AES Fellow

Check out this set of measurements ordered from top being A and bottom D:

See how clean and tidy the top speaker is and how "muddy" the measurements are in the rest?  Keep that in mind as you read the results of the listening tests:

There are some clear visual correlations between the subjective preference ratings of the loudspeakers, and shape and smoothness of their measured curves. The most preferred loudspeaker (Loudspeaker A) has the flattest and smoothest on-axis and listening window curves, which is well maintained in its off-axis curves. In contrast to this, the less preferred Loudspeakers B, C and D all show various degrees of misbehavior in their magnitude response both on and off-axis. Loudspeaker B has a “boom-and-tizz” character from the overemphasis in the low and high frequency ranges, combined with an uneven midrange response. Loudspeaker C has a similar mismatch in level between the bass and midrange/treble, in addition to a series of resonances above 300 Hz that appear in all of the spatially averaged curves. Loudspeaker D has a relatively smooth response across all of its curves but there is a large mismatch in level at 400 Hz between the bass and the midrange/treble regions. Together these irregularities in the on and off-axis curves are indicative of sound quality problems that were reflected in the lower preference ratings given to Loudspeakers B, C and D.

We are so lucky that what our ears pass for good sound, also passes the test of logic: that we want neutral sounding speakers.  Not something that screws up the tonality of our content.  That is again, if we just listen and don't look.

Above is also the reason I keep asking @soundfield for measurements.  This should always be the first question you ask of any speaker company.  If they don't have measurements are are afraid of sharing them, run, and run fast.

I’d be interested in any info people have about specific product reviews on asr that you think got it wrong. The findings are all there for public consumption. Please post a link if you know of examples. Thanks

Years back, when Halcro first came to market, one of their claims to fame was that they had amps that were exhibiting such amazing measurements that they were ground breaking. No other manufacturer could deliver a product with the type of measurements that these amps delivered. Problem was that as soon as any reviewer with half a decent ear listened to them, they were pretty much dismissed as not good sounding at all!( even though JA and others did measure them and were astounded by what they found, which conformed to Halcro's marketing).

I don't know such history but the Internet does. Here is JA's review of Halcro DM38: 

Sound
"To this day, I have yet to hear any amplifier that equals the dm58's combination of complete neutrality, harmonic generosity, lightning reflexes, and a sense of boundless power that is difficult to describe," was how Paul Bolin summed up his experience with Halcro's dm58 monoblock. It also nicely describes my reaction to the dm58 when the review pair briefly spent some time in my listening room.

Ahem.  It is not going your way, is it?  :)  Continuing:

The dm38 didn't pale in comparison with my 18-month-old memories of the dm58s. "Awesome dynamics," I noted, after playing Prince's Musicology (CD, NPG 74645 84692 7) two times through after hearing Prince live at Madison Square Garden; "awesome!" 

[...]

Perhaps more important, as well as excellent macrodynamics—the differences between loud and soft and how consistent the amplifier's presentation was at the dynamic extremes—the dm38 also excelled at reproducing microdynamics. By this mean I mean how well it preserved the tonal and imaging differences among different sonic objects at different levels. 

[...]

The Halcro allowed me easily to identify how each instrument was contributing to the combined tone, regardless of the speakers I was using.  At the risk of venturing into the semantic void, it wasn't just that the dm38 reproduced the sounds of instruments or voices with superb fidelity; it also excelled at reproducing the space between those instruments. Remember that the stereo image is an illusion, its fragility due to the brain's having to put aside what the ears actually hear in favor of reconstructing a simulated space between and behind the speakers.

 

Still not backing your claim.  But maybe it is this bit of subjectivity that you are hanging your hat on:

So, the dm38 combined great dynamics and great bass control with a superbly transparent view into the recorded soundstage. Its treble was free from grain and its midrange was as smooth as silk. However, I couldn't escape the feeling that the amplifier's tonal balance was on the lean, cool side. 

He ends with:

Summing up
It may be expensive, but Halcro's dm38 effortlessly joins the ranks of top-rated power amplifiers, not only for its sound quality but also its measured performance (not a given; witness some recent reviews). 

[...]

Like the dm58 monoblock, the dm38 is balanced toward the cool side of the spectrum—though I am sure Bruce Candy will argue that the Halcro amplifiers are actually neutral compared with the competition—so it will work best with speakers and source components that don't themselves sound lean. But with optimal system matching, the Halcro's effortless dynamics and astonishingly clean presentation will satisfy the listener's soul.

So this matches your definition of "they were pretty much dismissed as not good sounding at all!"???  Really? He couldn't gosh any more than he did.  Was he wrong about all of the above?  That it can satisfy your soul?  

How about this other reviewer:

Conclusion
The Halcro dm38 is among the best amplifiers in the world at any price. Its sound quality easily competes with the amplifiers from Krell, Mark Levinson, Pass Labs, Bel Canto, Spectral, Ayre, Boulder or any of the other players in the ultra-high-end market. At this level of performance, the sonic characteristics of the amplifiers become harder and harder to describe as they become closer to the proverbial "closer to the music" phenomenon. However, if forced to describe the Halcro's sound quality I find the Halcro sound to be similar to that of the Krell FPB series except a bit quicker and with less weight in the bass. For those in the market for a reference grade amplifier with the ability to resolve the slightest nuances, I strongly recommend a close look at the Halcro dm series.

This is your definition of bad review?  

No, companies go out of business because in high end audio, it is 80% marketing, 20% engineering.  Fail at the former and you go out of business.

A lot of fun to follow. A J you are looking weak! @soundfield are you going to take that!?