Oh, measure away. Just keep in mind that maybe the right things aren't being measured.
Tom
You know, if you read what I write, you might find out that we agree. Science is NEVER settled, by definition.
Let me quote my previous post...
"As a scientist I make the claim that our psycho acoustic models are insufficient and our resulting measurements inadequate to measure what sounds good..."
In Western Science we use empiricism to develop the science models from which we create the measurements.... rinse and repeat.
I would fully expect that a forum that is titled "Measurement based" would support a discussion... As you pointed out
"
It seems you are looking for a debate"
Indeed I am. Do you have a problem with that? We debate about things at work all the time. About work that is. Such is science and R&D.
Have you ever done a Peer Review of your work? We do it all the time, that's how we learn from others, Listen to their opinions and facts. We don't insult each other... like that guy who "blocked" me and even sent me a PM to tell me he was blocking me. There's a closed mind. So be it.
Don't be like that. Always keep an open mind.
Oh well.... there's a lot of snake oil in the field of audio. Starting with the likes of Bose, the Home Theater stuff and a lot of the High End. Often they sell you stuff that indeed affects the sound, whether it's worthwhile is irrelevant, as that is subjective. And often it can be measured indeed. But often the reasons provided by the marketing dept are ludicrous...
Sometimes, like that post about that outfit that "measured" network based noise on the DAC.... they use fallacious logic, it's called "Appeal to Authority". They show a bunch of intruments as if they knew what they are doing and us, the readers, are supposed to trust them because they are authorities in the field and "know what they're doing". In reality, they have no clue, as they are measuring the wrong thing, but most people don't know enough and trust them.... yet those of us who know how to take measurements know they are just BS'ing.
Not that we can not hear differences introduced into the system, but that the causes of the why we hear differently are not the ones that are being "measured" in that marketing "report". I would expect stuff like that, their faulty logic, is EXACTLY one of the things withing scope and discussed in this forum.
However, sometimes we know WHY things sound different... take negative 2nd order harmonic and 3rd order harmonic. Yet we don't know WHY we like the former and not the latter... nor why we don't like higher order harmonics. Yet, sometimes we design with 2nd in mind because, we like it.
Take some of my amps, class A and tubes. They measure horrible according to the ASR crowd. Julian Hirsch and David Ranada would have gone apoplexic over them... yet, people love them and pay good money for them. Have you ever heard a Class A SIT amp? Gorgeous sound, believable soundstage... 45 watts into 8 ohms at 1Khz at 1% THD (*). If you went by pure, agreed upon measurements you would think that would be a terrible amplifier. Certainly Amir would think so. But when you sit down to listen to it... hmm... hey.... the thing sounds really good.
Then you got LPs. I got thousands of them. Supposedly they measure bad yet they often blow 24/48 recordings... and sometimes they even match the master tapes. Why is it that digital supposedly measures so well and yet sounds so bad?
Again, there is measuring and listening. Someday they will correlate, but you don't want to throw either of them out with the bath water. It's a learning experience.
So, yes indeed, it is a DEBATE and we learn from that. Keep an open mind.
Peace and good tunes, man.
(*) BTW, measuring THD, and THD+N, is mostly irrelevant. An outcrop of the FTC decision back in the late 70s. Ideally we want to know the frequency based spectrum of the distortion. 2nd order is not that bad, 3rd can be handled but 4th and 5th and so on are terrible.