Pleasurably better, not measurably better

@holmz but if one is listening to music, ears are NEVER removed from the equation.  Hence the real real-world artificiality is when one depends solely on laboratory measurements that have cut the ears off.

@holmz The list provides the room info.  There's really nothing to see but the cherry plywood walls and surface treatment (can't see the HFTs).  I'll try to find the Acoustic Fields video and post my room as finished.  

@erik_squires 

What if I like 2.8% distortion?  Sure, we can measure it, but the engineering goal of lower is not the same as my personal listening goal of making things that sound good to me. 

If you prefer 2.8% distortion that's fine and dandy.
Who knows, on certain music and certain genres I might like it too.

But then again what if this 2.8% distortion is always audible, on all music?

What if this sometimes nice distortion on some recordings then turns into nasty distortion that you can't 'hear through'?

Perhaps the strongest argument for neutrality is that you get to hear the differences in different recordings rather than them all being smothered in the same sonic sauce.

I recall that of the criticisms of the Linn LP12 was that it put it's own sonic signature on everything that was played upon it, as opposed to decks like the Pink Triangle which were far more neutral.

This sonic signature (midbass warmth?) could sometimes suit certain types of music (jazz soul and funk?) and sometimes spoil others (piano, strings, pop, and rock?). 

I was again reminded of this whilst watching the latest video from the audiophlliac himself, Steve Guttenberg, who recently changed his reference loudspeakers.

One of the reasons Steve puts forward for swapping his Klipsch Cornwall's for the PureAudioProject Duet 15's is exactly this issue about neutrality.

Even if the Cornwall's do other things better, the more neutral 15s allow you to hear the differences between recordings better. 

The problem with audible distortion is that there is no such thing as an entirely benevolent distortion in all cases..

Even if the Cornwall's do other things better, the more neutral 15s allow you to hear the differences between recordings better. 

I've not heard Pure Audio speakers in a very long time, and certainly not these models.  I am however always skeptical when someone says they switched speakers to hear more.  It's usually hearing something DIFFERENT than they did before.  Not saying he's wrong, but this is a claim I've seen a hundred times from a dozen reviewers and IMHO neutrality was not the reason.

holmz but if one is listening to music, ears are NEVER removed from the equation. Hence the real real-world artificiality is when one depends solely on laboratory measurements that have cut the ears off.

this (below) mostly covers it:

I’ve not heard Pure Audio speakers in a very long time, and certainly not these models. I am however always skeptical when someone says they switched speakers to hear more. It’s usually hearing something DIFFERENT than they did before. Not saying he’s wrong, but this is a claim I’ve seen a hundred times from a dozen reviewers and IMHO neutrality was not the reason.

^this^
One can have the same exact music playing on the same system, and every time it can have subtle difference in what we perceive and focus on.

It is like a magic trick at a dealer’s shop, when they say listen to the “shimmer of the cymbals,” that is pretty much all we hear.
We are so busy focusing on one hand, that the other hand can literally pull a rabbit out of the hat or thin air.

So it is not so much that we all hear differently, it is more like we all focus differently, and the same person can change they’re focussing on.

At least with measurements we might get to the point where we find that all of the ones with certain squiggles we either like or don’t like.

And we are not likely to be fooling anyone, as the majority of people seem to find a set of gear either sounds good or doesn’t… and they quickly can acclimate to the sound. And that some measurements correlate with good sound.

To say that the ears are all different would be like saying that the feel of a block of ice or a hot stove is different because all people “feel” differently. I sort of doubt it.
Maybe it is possible…
But I would like to know the temperature, of say a bath, before I get in it… then over time I might find I like 95F water better than 50F or 130F.

Lastly; I do not mind know knowing that my gear is technically inferior, and that I still like it.
I am not going to be listening to graph paper… even though I know some people can read sheet music and hear the sound in their head. For them the ears are not even involved… much like Beethoven and other composers can be partially or totally deaf.

When we see high noise values we can pretty much expect to start with a system that will be hissing.
And when we see a spray of harmonics, like the 4th through 10th trailing out to the right, we know it is not count to be smooth and warm, and we know it before the Beethoven even starts playing.

Arguing about the relative level of 2nd and 3rd harmonics is like comparing the bath water preference of 90, 95 and 100F. Or why we have salt and pepper shakers on the table.

Everyone’s tongues are not that different, some people just do not care for too much spice.