I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.

• This is impossible with a proper measurement set.

If they measure so close, I personally would not trust user listening tests unless they don't know what they are listening to. The potential to fool ourselves is too high.

• I found this mindset short sighted and shallow  when advocated by the late Julian Hirsch decades ago and certainly even more so more so today. The distrust and dismissive mocking of  what a human being hears and yet pure allegiance to measurements. Two divergent camps, count me in with the listeners.
• Charles 

The more I read that measurements don’t matter, the more it makes me want to question whether the expert opinions from amp designers have merit.
Hence I bring it up.

Maybe a 2nd reading is in q. I haven’t read anyone proclaiming measurements don’t matter. Rather the point is that measurements aren’t reliably predictive of what a given audio product will sound like. They do not replace the act of listening. Good night to all.

Charles

You keep mentioning divergent camps, and also the OP stated:

I don’t want to start a measurements vs listening war and I’d appreciate it if you guys don’t

But Ralph did point out where the measurements and the listening are at odds… and why they are at odds.

Can anybody provide some insight to why some people are stuck on audio measurements? Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep

• In SS or Class-D amps one wants pretty stunning measurements.
  • Otherwise even 90-100 dB+ SINAD can sound distressing depending on the TYPE of distortion.
• In a tube amp, one could have a SINAD of say 60 and it would sound pretty likeable and musical if the lower order distortions are masking the higher order harmonics.

Basically we want no higher order harmonics, or if we “have to have them”, then we want to have them masked by lower order harmonics.
(And some IMD stuff related to feedback bandwidth gain product.)

If I got that wrong maybe @atmasphere can tidy up my understanding of it.

I found this mindset short sighted and shallow  when advocated by the late Julian Hirsch decades ago and certainly even more so more so today.

 

Things change. I think that was the 70s? We didn't have cell phones, or even personal computers.

I hear noise raised as an issue but to me it's a false issue for me and likely most. My system is dead quiet during silent portions of tracks. Other system issues? What are they if inaudible?

The camps are not as you describe them in your case and this topic. This is not about measurements defining a sound which I don't see anyone saying in this topic. It is about measurements being able to test the lumits of what is audible. As most audiophiles never test their claims of what they can hear, I see little reason to believe them.  If you want to define camps, I see the camps, primarily, as those that accept humans are fallible, variable, and whose perceptions are hence also fallible and variable, and those that do not.  

• In SS or Class-D amps one wants pretty stunning measurements.
  • Otherwise even 90-100 dB+ SINAD can sound distressing depending on the TYPE of distortion.
• In a tube amp, one could have a SINAD of say 60 and it would sound pretty likeable and musical if the lower order distortions are masking the higher order harmonics.

I think the comparison was feedback and no feedback not tubes and no tubes specifically. I think the critical element was low distortion at all frequencies and at low to high power.  I did not find the use of the 90-100db term well defined. Perhaps @atmasphere can expand on that.