A challenge to the "measurement" camp

I’ve watched some of his video and I actually agree on some of what he said,
but he seems too confident on his insistence on measurement. For those
who expound on the merits of blind test and measurement, why not turn
the table upside down?

Why not do a blind test of measurement? That is I will supply all the measurement
you want, can you tell me which is a better product?

For example, if I have a set of cable, and a set of measurement for each
individual cable, can you tell me which is the best cable based on measurement
alone? I will supply all the measurement you want.
After all, that is what you’re after right? Objective result and not subjective
listening test.

Fast forward to 8:15 mark where he keeps ranting about listening test
without measurement.  

By the way, is he getting paid by Belden?  Because he keeps talking about it
and how well it measures.  I've had some BlueJean cables and they can easily
bettered by some decent cables.  
What thickness is right?

Well, the only cable property that matters is it's resistance.
A cable resistance equals to the material conductivity constant (cooper),
multiplied by its length (in meters) and divided by its cross section (mm sq.).
This resistance shall fit so it will be way smaller than the Amp's DF. (Output resistance). 
Usually, the Amp and length required are a given. 
So what left to play with is the thickness.
Today SS good Amps have a DF of 200 and above...
PASS LAB = 200
Luxman = 700
Tube Amp have a low DF (20 and less) so it's insignificant.
D-class tend to have a DF in the thousands: as high as 4000 and more.
Tell me what is your Amp's DF and what length you need, and I'll calculate for you the optimal thickness (in # awg).

A test been conducted two years ago, by myself, and those who pioneered it, ended up very happy. The old cable (no matter how expensive it was, and some were as high as $17,000 a pair, went into storage. The DIY offered ended up (mostly) under $100.-

It seems refreshing articles.... Thanks

Bernardo Kastrup is in itself a new sign of the changing tides....

 And Goethe will be understood tomorrow....

There is some hope perhaps in these creepy times....
...speaking of putting math, the primary tool thingee that allows measurements to be analyzed, into perspective....


....which kinda implies that in the big picture things run out of precision pretty darn quick...to the point where most seemingly absolute proofs are reduced to wild-assed guesses in fairly short order ( assuming of course you are using analysis of any sort that relies on math...)...the problem that occurs when observations are reduced to theory which depends on the use of a logic type different from the observation...historically the difference between magic and scientific cosmologies ( and no, magic here doesn’t refer to hats and rabbits...one refers more to the name, and the other to the thing named...different logic types eh... )

B4, the only thing g that matters? Because you say? The only thing that matters is how it affects the sound, period. Other than the sound, why are we in this hobby. If you hear a difference worth spending the money on, then do it. If you don’t, then don’t. It completely does away with any need for measurements that in the end obviously don’t cover all the bases of why people do hear differences, and for sure isn’t going to tell you if person A is going g to like it, or person B won’t. Any more than you can measure music and tell who will like which. Measurements are good for what they do, but it’s when people try to misapply them that things get wonky. I can’t tell you how many times theories on black holes has changed over the years. And I bet will again.