David is a manufacturer (fact). Attempted lifesaver aside:
Your post above is such a cop out for amplifiers costing over $200,000.00 where you have to attempt to aid their bass performance with additional room reenforcement; when the JC-1+ amps in the same system conditions did not require it. As much as the above and the previous posts say about the amplifiers in question, the evaluation methodology says much more about the reviewer. While most things in this hobby are highly subjective, and at time appear all arbitrary, the expectations are that evaluations by professionals should be carried out by methods that are framed within a control set of parameters. The anything goes approach, to try to achieve the “product's maximum possible performance”, detailed above does not lead anyone to possibly reach any meaningful conclusions. Let me repeat, in order to identify the “optimal” conditions all possible permutations need to be evaluated, logistically and fundamentally this is not possible, so for best analysis the test bed should be constrained to the evaluation of the changes that arise from one variable change at a time, in order to asses the relative performance differences between any two components under analysis. After all this is the whole point of reviewers maintaining a reference system.
Since according to your stated “product's maximum possible performance” evaluation methodology, the CH Precision amplifiers are not required for evaluations of future amplifiers, when do the amplifiers go back to CH Precision? Your product review and assessment methodology does not support keeping manufacturers‘ products as the system setup is not maintained consistent.
