@atmasphere When I'm speaking of accuracy and it's association with color, I'm thinking about two components that measure exactly the same in every measurement undertaken. Now lets say those measurements are such that one was deemed to be an accurate component. Will these two components, or any number of components tested, meeting the above criteria necessarily sound exactly the same.
There is a failure of logic in this post. If all the proper measurements are taken and they are the same, the two pieces will sound the same too.
Since the rest of your post is based on a faulty premise, you might want to rethink this.
40 years ago it really wasn't practical to do the measurements that we can today. Sometime in that period we turned a corner. But the important specs don't show up on spec sheets for the most part (I do remember seeing an Adcom spec sheet clearly showing an increase in distortion above 3KHz, showing why the amp had brightness and harshness- even 20 years ago, this stuff was starting to show up). But audiophiles for the most part are living their lives as if the only measurements we can make were those of the 1980s and before. Back in those days the spec sheets were the Emperor's New Clothes- an amp that looked good on paper rarely sounded good as well.
This problem of audiophiles living their lives according to how things were 30-40 years ago has caused a lot of suffering (and to be clear, when people have made up stories about life and life does not agree with those stories, that is the source of all human suffering). Back then, if the manufacturer, distributor or dealer's lips were moving, he was lying and this has been a way of life for so long that we collectively no longer think about the fact that we are being lied to, we just know and accept that we will have to take the damn thing home and listen to it to know how it really sounds!
We are living in a transitional time where the measurement tech has caught up with our subjective experience- now we can measure things that we hear with excellent correlation. The problem now is actually seeing the specs we need to see and knowing what they are telling us.
I've outlined all this previously.
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.
@charles1dad 's comment here puts this dilemma in a nutshell- although I've always appreciated his comments as being some of the more level headed seen on this forum, the simple fact is that we have arrived at a point where the quote above was true at one point but isn't any more (although his advice of simply listening to see if it works for you is quite valid). If we do all the measurements (including in the room itself) we can quite reliably predict how things will turn out. Honestly it appears to me that people don't do all the homework. For example, how many here have run pink noise through their system to see how it fares in the room? FWIW these days that is quite easy compared to only a few years ago- as they say, 'there's an app for that'.
Pink noise can show you room issues, breakups in speaker cones, all sort of pesky stuff! It won't show you brightness caused by distortion, but you can get that information from proper measurements of the electronics.
FWIW I fault the 'objectivist' camp as much as the 'subjectivists' in this debate. Many of them don't know about all the specs that make a difference and allow their expectation bias to color their perceptions. IOW guilty of exactly the same thing as the people they fault. That is no way to make progress! Put another way if one is in possession of the facts, then one knows there is no good reason for objectivists and subjectivists to be at odds.