What do you guys think of Audio Science Review?

I quit reading ASR after some weird reviews on Schiit stuff that claimed dangerous electrical hazard, on equipment that used a wall wart to generate the DC supply.

It seemed as if there was a real bias against Schiit gear. The slavish measurement focus seems a rechanneling of Julian Hirsch. I have read commentary that takes issue with their measurement techniques as well.

I guess I should be honored to have had such an extensive reply to a long ago comment, as many others have in this flurry of comments. I would add on behalf of Jason Stoddard and Mike Moffat that they seem to know very much what they are doing, judging from the sound quality of my Schiit Saga and Yggdrasil. If beneficial exchange has occurred between them and Amir, I say great. My original comment was based on statements made in an ASR Schiit review that I then did not find understand, that there was a dangerous grounding fault with a piece of equipment that ran on DC from a wall wart. From memory, this piece of equipment did not have an internal power supply. It was long enough ago that I do not remember the actual piece in question.

I stand very much on the side of listening tests, as measurements made under static conditions do not adequately represent dynamic conditions. Hence, equipment that measures well for example may sound congested when sudden changes in current is required, such as crescendoes. SID and TIM come to mind, amongst others. As a scientist myself, I agree that it is wonderful to try to understand why things sound as they do through trying to advance our understanding of how measurements can better predict auditory outcome. I am most impressed with how understanding has advanced of the differing characteristics of different capacitor designs, and yet measurement does not necessarily differentiate amongst them.