Is ASR for real, or is it only for those sub $1k or even sub $2K?

Let me draw an analogy. I went from physics to running an organisation. My natural inclination was to try to quantify everything like an accountant. This approach is powerful. Yet, I soon realised it is only half the story. The soft side is just as important as the hard numbers. 

Counting is the easy bit. It gives the anally retentive a false sense of security. There is no point in nailing down details that are not relevant to the desired outcome. Measuring what is important is usually much harder if not impossible. 

I don’t deny the value of accountants. But I wouldn’t want them running the show, unless they are prepared to step outside the narrow confines of their original discipline. 

The key point here is giving more credence to quantitative data and ignoring qualitative data is short sighted and potentially disastrous. We tend to do that because it's superficially easier.

@markwd 

They are using cod psychology to rubbish the experiences of others, which are just as valid as their narrow numbers obsessed world view.

@newton_john +1

I'm a retired scientist(polymer chemist) and large-data analyst. I spent my career  creating and/or analyzing data to yield multivariate models that would adequately describe real world observations.  I've visited ASR only for an amount of time to figure out what they are doing.  

I don't want to live in that world, never have. 

markwd

... If there is nothing present in the signal that might be the basis for a claimed experience, then the claimed experience is ...

You reveal your bias by characterizing the experience of others as a "claimed experience." You're discounting the evidence before you've examined it.

It's not some kind of inverted bias to simply say that it is unlikely there are auditory differences when measurements support that claim.

No, it's not "inverted bias" - it's absolute bias pure and simple. Direct experience is a key part of the scientific method, yet you dismiss the empirical evidence as merely a "claim" because it doesn't dovetail with your belief system. So you're a measurementalist, not a scientist.