Originally Posted by clockworks999:
“I wasn't questioning the accuracy of the test instruments, but whether they are measuring the things that matter. There's more to music than dB levels and frequency response.”
That debate has been going on as long as I have been reading HiFi mags (a very very long time

). Trouble is every time engineers come up with a new test the snake-oil peddlers keep moving the goalposts and insist the measurement has no relevance.
Measurements can give a guideline. For instance an amplifier with a 10dB dip in frequency response at 1kHz is going to sound pretty naff compared to one that is flat across the band. Same for other core measurements.
But the point is that people claim changing a component makes an audible difference. Since that must by definition mean differences in the air vibrations impacting the ear it follows that there must be differences in the electrical signals flowing through the kit making the noise.
If however the two signals prove to be identical then how can they possibly sound different? That defies all logic.
Originally Posted by clockworks999:
“As an engineer (of sorts) myself, there's the temptation to assume that, if it can't be measured, it doesn't exist. Thing is, when you listen, rather than measure, you can hear the differences between parts of the system that shouldn't make a difference, like cables.”
But cables can make a difference. they are complex networks of resistance, capacitance and inductance. Therefore they act like filters and can alter the signal passing through them. So it is entirely possible that cables alter the sound (analogue anyway).
As for it only exists if you measure it. Try talking to a quantum physicist about that

Thing is you can analyse an electrical signal flowing through a wire to a high level of accuracy. Certainly enough I would hope to see differences that might explain the differences heard by the listener.
Originally Posted by clockworks999:
“I did most of my subjective listening when vinyl was king. I was seduced into switching to CD by the lack of surface noise and ease of use. Too late, I realised that I didn't actually enjoy listening to music on CD. The emotion was gone.
Technically, CD probably measures better than vinyl, but it's lifeless, no soul.”
Personally i would never go back to vinyl. I never did get this vinyl sounds better than CD thing. Different yes but better? Not so sure.
Originally Posted by clockworks999:
“Have you ever heard a track on the radio,in the car, or at a club and really liked it? You buy the CD, take it home and play it on a decent system. It leaves you cold.
Why's that? - it measures better at home on a quality system, so why don't you enjoy it more?”
If you want your home CD to sound the same as the radio you need a couple of things.
A pair of these to connect CD to amplifier
http://www.aptx.com/content.asp?page=92
And one of these to process the s*** out of it.
http://www.orban.com/products/radio/fm/8500/
The first onverts the audio to a APT-X encoded bitstream to feed down a BT Kilostream line and the second is the (in)famous Otimod processor to mangle the sound.
And in a club the atmosphere probably plays its part. A few beverages and even the Birdie song sounds good
No one ever said that measurements told you how good something sounds. All they can tell you is how well the equipment conveys the information contained in the recording. How you perceive that information is an entirely different matter.