Van Alstine?

Deering, pretty silly and pointless analog, don't you think? Can you tell the class why that is so?

Again, you're still not able to come up with any valid reason why the golden-ears who partook in the Stereo Review test couldn't tell differences. You simply stating that you can is obviously invalid and sufficient only for self delusion.

Note how the golden ears in sighted testing noted all sorts of major differences, using typical audiophile gobbledigook, and once unsighted, they completely lost it. I LOVE that aspect of the test.

Tried an Insight 440H and was disappointed with the SQ.

Returned it for a refund.

85,

Can you give me a list or several pairs of currently manufactured amps that measure the same. I'd like to see if I can set something up. Or is this just some airey-fairey postur? If it's true it can be repeated.

No need; it has been proven time and again that folks can't even tell differences between vastly different amplifiers, exactly like the Stereo Review test. Not even the self-proclaimed golden ears. Have you read the test yet? It's not going to bite you.

If you're newish to hi-fi, say within the last ten years, you wouldn't know about the exhaustive research done into this by all sorts of degreed folks and audiophiles throughout the 70s and 80s. We have forgotten about it in the never ending barrage of subjective reviewing by reviewers who can't hear all sorts of measured problems as proven in Stereophile, and hokey advertising by profit-driven vendors about the VAST differences their silly trinkets will make.

For your own test, take any recent mass-market receiver and compare it blind with with your amp; difficult to do without a switcher, but it can be done with a friend. The results are NEVER pleasing to folks who proclaim to be able to hear all sorts of differences.

When was the last time you compared an amp from the 70's to a high end amp made recently? It's no surprise they couldn't distinguish a cheap receiver from a high end amp back them.