I totally agree that the hobby has no place for obnoxious dogma. I also agree with someone’s observation that there are anti-measurement obnoxious dogmatics as well. Me? I think measurements are really important, and helpful. They help me be more rigorous in characterizing what I hear. For example, if I like something that sounds enjoyably “warm” to my ears, I can then look at a frequency response to see if it has a rolled off treble, or a midrange bump, or whatever. That allows me to better focus on exactly what characteristics I prefer and find equipment I’m likely to like. This is also why I prefer Stereophile reviews over The Absolute Sound, at the margin. The reviewers don’t see Atkinson’s measurements until after they submit their reviews. That enforces a level of discipline that’s missing among most reviewers. I also believe that the digital side of the hobby benefits even more from measurements than the analog side, for obvious reasons.
And don’t get me started on streamers, network switches and the like. If someone says a network switch “lowers the noise floor”, I’d like to see a measurement of that, because it’s easily done. Ironically, I’m primarily a vinyl and tubes guy, with Audio Note ANEs and restored Altec Santiago’s in my two main systems, so I’m obviously not driven by measurements. But to me, ignoring measurements unnecessarily limits your knowledge-base.
Am reminded of my journey with single malt scotch. After my first few years of experience, I had a definite understanding of which scotches were my faves. But when I spent 10 days in Edinburgh, I found a chart that sorted the major scotches into 4 taste-profile quadrants. Lo snd behold, all my faves were bunched together in the Northwest quadrant. This “measurement” provided me with important “data” to supplement my experiential information, and helped me be a better informed scotch drinker. And yes, scotch drinking definitely enhances my audio experience!
