The Audio Science Review (ASR) approach to reviewing wines.

measurements are critical to audio, but a 100 grams of german chocolate measures the same 100g as  100g of dog crap. they dont taste the same.

a coupla other observations:
refusing to grasp the limitations of measurement is some form of flat-eartherism.
"objectivists" are ayn rand devotees. that has nothing to do with hifi audio.

As for the amplifiers that I’ve owned or borrowed and enjoyed the most, none really offered what anyone would refer to as spectacular measurements.

"Measurements" is too crude a word. @prof was pointing at this issue and this comment ignores it.

Some measurements are, say, 2nd harmonic distortions -- those may upset some at ASR, but the rest of us understand that those measurements are NOT aligned with "bad sound" as some of us experience that. (Others here do NOT like that 2nd harmonic. So, this varies.)

But other measurements are of a kind that correlates to what we would ALL agree are responsible for a bad-sounding product. Some of us here applaud ASR and others for measuring things which DO correlate with "bad sound."

As @prof put it:

It’s like so many audiophiles imagined that measurements are just plucked out of the air for no reason at all. The whole point of measurements is that they have been correlated to how things sound. That’s the point of measurements! And scientific study has shown that certain measurements correlate to what most people will rate as higher quality.

Of course, there are issues with how ASR folks do things, as @analog_aficionado points out:

Objective measurements are great tools insofar as the results are understood and interpreted properly. This is where the current debate seems to run into trouble. Take SINAD (aka THD+N) for example. There seems to be a monomaniacal over-emphasis on this metric as an end-all-be-all measurement which somehow dominates the subjective performance of a piece of equipment over most other aspects of performance....I would even argue that THD in the context of electronics is increasingly irrelevant, given how low distortion is in most modern designs. Turn to another famous objectivist like Ethan Winer, and you’ll find excellent demonstrations of the audibility of THD.

So why chase after 0.0002% THD in a DAC or amplifier? I’ve built, lived with and loved tube amplifiers with rather embarrassing distortion figures compared to the modern benchmark....So measurements have their sensible limits as well. It does no good to go overboard with a single specification.

It’s a complex debate. My main issue is how people simplify the issues too much. Maybe people like to remain vague on what a "measurement" is because they like to "take a stand" against so-called "objectivists" or "measurementalists." But that is not playing fair with language and the result is to perpetuate misunderstanding.

Finally, I am certain that @audio_aficinado nails it with this comment:

But I do know this: a ruler (even a really really awesome one) is just not good enough. The human perception of sound is not well understood and even less well quantified, and there are many aspects of objective technical performance of audio equipment that we already know something about which are being overlooked.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to this for me:

Objective audio measurements must by definition be subservient to the Subjective outcome. If not, then we aren’t talking about hi-fi anymore.

I had a long and bitter debate with Ethan Winer about this. My position is that there may be things heard which cannot be measured because the brain and perception are way WAY beyond our understanding at this point in our scientific understanding. His reply to that was, essentially, "No, it’s just placebo effect and subjective bias." (In other words, y’all are just in denial.) He could be right about that claim, but he has no basis for making it, and we’re just back in the realm of rhetoric, not argument.

Anyone who bases their buying decisions on the results of a single review or site is extremely misguided.

ASR provides just one data point out of the myriad of data points available. They provide accurate measurements (as far as I can tell) and an opinion. Listening is an optional part of their approach.

In conjunction with all of the other information available about a product ASR is just another tool and provides useful information. No one is forcing anyone to do anything here, it is YOU that decide how to treat the information you find.

Even the French agreed to blind taste testing, but like audiophiles, complained about the results when their wines didn’t win.  

     No one can tell you whether/how your system, room and/or ears will respond to some new addition.   There are simply too many variables.

     LIKEWISE: no one can possibly know whether a new addition (ie: some kind of disc, crystal, fuse, interconnect, speaker cable, etc)  will make a difference, in their system and room, with their media and to their ears, without trying them for themselves.   

     Many companies offer a 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee, so- those that are actually interested, have absolutely nothing to lose by trying (experimenting with) such.     

     Anyone that knows anything about the sciences, realizes that something like 96% of what makes up this universe, remains a mystery.       

     For centuries; humanity’s seen, heard, felt and otherwise witnessed phenomena that none of the best minds could fathom, UNTIL they developed a science or measurement that could explain it.     

     The Naysayers want you to trust their antiquated science (1800’s electrical theory) and faith-based, religious doctrine, BLINDLY (their credo: "Trust ME!"). 

     Theories have never proven or disproven anything.  It’s INVARIABLY testing and experimentation that proves or disproves theories/hypotheses.   

     IF you’re interested in the possibility of improving your system’s presentation, have a shred of confidence in your capacity for perceiving reality and trust your own senses: actually TRY whatever whets your aural appetite, or- piques the curiosity, FOR YOURSELF