Audio Science Review = Rebuttal and Further Thoughts

I’m not sure I’d do a profile either, I tend to put as little information as possible into online repositories when I’m not the paying client.

If it helps to contextualise, my source is usually Apple Music on M2 MacBook Pro > asynchronous USB audio over Apple Thunderbolt Pro cable to exaSound e68 DAC > SWAMP Premium Mini XLR to Krell KAV-2250 > Analysis Plus Black Oval 12 cable to above-mentioned AP Codex sitting on AP mag-lev feet.

In audiophile style I’ve even checked cable details for all ya’ll.

Oh nearly forgot the Teddy Pardo power supply for the DAC (couldn't come at the standard wall-wart). Also amusingly, the Apple cable cost just a bit more per metre than the Analysis Plus. But it has excellent haptics.

@prof how about that we have something in common, the Node. I like the Bluos software and it sounds OK on my desktop. In my main system it isn't a good match. With the DAC you use it should be fine as a streamer though. Have you ever taken any measurements?

@milpai

Have you ever noticed any system posted by the so called measurement folks? I don’t doubt that some of them might have actually some good components. I feel it must be because they believe in measurements, they simply purchased a pair of speaker, some components and plopped them in some corner or even worse, who knows.

I don’t know if careful setup is part of their system implementation process. Actually placement is the only measurement I do in my system. Takes me days sometimes when I fine tune with my ears. But when you purchase a pair of loudspeaker based on driver measurements (parts measurement, not sum of whole speaker), then I guess placement would not matter.

I don’t know if I fully qualify (I do like to see measurements but I’d baulk at buying an amp or speaker without listening). But setup measurements are totally useful and necessary in my book.

I bought new speakers last year (Audio Physic Codex, replacing Tempo) put them where the old ones were. Had a decent listen first and made some notes. Bass had a boom but mid-bass was dry. Midrange maybe too forward but along with treble it’s clear and really pretty nice. Toed them in a bit.

Ran measuring app (Fuzzmeasure with the mic at listening position aka LP) with triple sweeps on left then right speakers. Nasty null 70-80 Hz (predicted coincidence of lateral and oblique modes per Amcoustics room model) obvious peak at 50 Hz (ditto, from the second long mode) and a few high-Q suckouts up to Schroeder (~300 Hz) bringing overall mid-bass energy down (explains ’boom’ and ’dry’). Marked out the floor at 200 mm steps and moved speakers toward the side wall, measuring each step. The null was mitigated (as you’d expect) but treble started to roll off a bit > 10 kHz, so four steps sideways then one step back. Similar stepping toward the back wall with no difference to the bass boom (as you’d expect, needs a metre or more in the other direction at that wavelength really but not enough room in the loft for that) but treble picked up again.

Adjusted toe-in to face LP. Stereo image is pretty nice (as expected from Audio Physic spaced wide and aimed properly). Toed-in to cross in front of LP but lost some soundstage width so back to aiming at me. Good so far. That leaves the 50 Hz peak and the 100-300 Hz range to fill in bit and match 1 kHz level. That’s what DSP is for so run Sonarworks (~ 40 sweeps around the listening position) and apply the classic B&K 1974 curve. Boom gone, nice subtle balancing of midbass warmth and a little bit of excess gone from the midrange. Stereo image focus improves as well. Looking and sounding pretty good now.

No one has to follow my methods of course, but they work for me. Why futz around in the dark? All the positive sonics of the gear but mitigate some negative impacts of the room (there’s more to that story but another time). There’s no contradiction in my mind between useful setup measurements and nice audio gear.

@milpai , that is an excellent point, I would like to see some "meat on the bone" and if someone wants to talk measurements, post some of your own and then lets talk. I would always try and get the room first, the speaker placement second, the power third, the IC's 4th and NOW you should be able to actually discern the difference a quality component makes. Otherwise I don't see how you will ever get the best value of the money spent.

@kota1 

To see a members system  from a thread just click on their handle/name in a post and click "details" in the drop down menu. You will be taken to their profile and if they have posted a system it will be linked right there.

Thanks. Yes I can "systems" briefly appear on your page before it vanishes. I may have my browser locked down too hard, or macOS/Safari may not be agreeable. I might try a bit later on a Windows VM ...

To see a members system  from a thread just click on their handle/name in a post and click "details" in the drop down menu.

Have you ever noticed any system posted by the so called measurement folks? I don't doubt that some of them might have actually some good components. I feel it must be because they believe in measurements, they simply purchased a pair of speaker, some components and plopped them in some corner or even worse, who knows.

I don't know if careful setup is part of their system implementation process. Actually placement is the only measurement I do in my system. Takes me days sometimes when I fine tune with my ears. But when you purchase a pair of loudspeaker based on driver measurements (parts measurement, not sum of whole speaker), then I guess placement would not matter.

@holmz , I thought everyone here knew how the virtual systems page works, my bad :). As for measurements, I am not against measurements, I thought posting them would be interesting if we are discussing measurements any way right?

To see a members system  from a thread just click on their handle/name in a post and click "details" in the drop down menu. You will be taken to their profile and if they have posted a system it will be linked right there.

prof if this is a rant, we are used to your rants by now. If this is a discussion please post your system photos, components, and measurements in your profile.

Well @kota1 you actually have measurements in your profile.
So I guess there is some part of science and measurements that you abide.

So where is the hostility tied to?
It is not like you took the measurements and decided to chuck them out n favour of listening.

Where do you post these? I can’t see anything separate (from regular posts) in the way of profile posts when I go to your profile, for example, but I may be missing something or looking in the wrong place.

@axo1989  under systems, which seems never to be easy to find.

@axo1989 good question, go to the link below, at the top you will see a tab "Create System" and you are on your way:

@kota1

@prof if this is a rant, we are used to your rants by now. If this is a discussion please post your system photos, components, and measurements in your profile.

Where do you post these? I can’t see anything separate (from regular posts) in the way of profile posts when I go to your profile, but I may be missing something or looking in the wrong place.

For example, I checked out an 'end game" thread you started that was listed there. That wasn't it. Tangentially, shame you didn't buy those Gallo's on Mapleshade, I fancied that setup myself.

@prof  you are a long time member and I assumed too much, understood. If you look at my profile you will see a list of components I use, pics of my rig, and my room measurements. Would you be so kind to post something similar in your profile? I am sincerely interested. Thanks

kota1

I have no idea what you mean by "showcasing" anything or what "data" you are requesting.

Lesson in communication:  Don't make a request of someone, pretending to be politely interested, in the same post where you disparage their views as "rants." 

It comes off as disingenuous.

@noske I am very interested in your system and data too, please post something. I hope you aren’t simply exaggerating either about your system or your IQ unless....

@prof I am very interested in your data, if you got it, post it in the system page in your profile. Otherwise I will let you go back to your rants. I really thought you could showcase something unless......

Will all the posters with the IQ as mentioned above please post your systems with pics and measurements in your profile? Please share, it will be really interesting to see how you have applied your knowledge and experience in real life, not just in a chat room. Looking forward :)

If you want to post data from your components, blind listening tests, etc. that would be a bonus.

Based on your previous response, I have a hunch you aren't that interested in data and blind tests, and the request for an equipment profile is often a distraction from the arguments.   It's been quite typical when discussing these issues that some audiophiles say "Well, I don't know whether to take you seriously until I see that you have Audiophile Certified High Priced Gear."  None of the arguments rely on whatever gear any of us have.  (And it NEVER matters what gear you have anyway, because the same people dismissing you will still find a way to dismiss you.  See for instance posting Amir's clearly high-end system, that didn't make a dent here).

I've posted many times about the various gear I own and have owned.  I don't care to make it a distraction in this particular thread.

@thyname like @djones51 I very much enjoy @prof’s posts as MH at ASR.

Speaking of identities, I recall someone posting as audio2design at ASR (they’re on my ignore list there, probably not a big surprise).

@fleschler thanks for hosting the afterparty ...

Will all the posters with the IQ as mentioned above please post your systems with pics and measurements in your profile? Please share, it will be really interesting to see how you have applied your knowledge and experience in real life, not just in a chat room. Looking forward :)

If you want to post data from your components, blind listening tests, etc. that would be a bonus.

@prof

Someone gets it, actually reading what I’ve written.

Yeah, not just reading but in appreciation.

There remain a few here who have an IQ above double digits who are grateful and feel blessed for your patience and thoughts and gentle disposition.

@djones51 

After reading Prof comments on Audiogon and MattHooper on ASR I would say they are the same person. Seems like a well rounded intelligent fellow who understands the value of measurements but not to the exclusion of what he enjoys. One can like vinyl but understand it doesn't measure as well as digital. You can like tube amps and know they can't measure better than a lot of SS amps. One can understand they are subject to human biases without assuming they are hallucinating, can understand that extraordinary claims that most tweaks advertise should provide extraordinary evidence. 

Hey!  Someone gets it, actually reading what I've written.  What a refreshing surprise!   Thanks djones51 !

Take a valium. Take hours, days, weeks, the requirement you have no idea what component was changed. Speakers wouldn't be practical but DACs or cables should be easy enough. I never passed a blind test on either of those. 

One more thought: keep measuring the wrong thing and the earth stays flat

Interesting thread. Many, including myself, believe that blind testing and A/B testing in general is flawed and not a reliable means to test for differences, identification or preferences between gear. The reasons are many and posted on many other forums including ASR.

I feel one must live with a “change” in gear for a period of days and over this time will come to better understand how the sound/music has changed. Yes, I trust we humans can decide this for ourselves with time.

Removing a sense, sight, does not necessarily make for a more accurate or statistically significant result. I think these short A/B comparisons place additional stress on the ear/brain processing and completely blocks the potential for a useful outcome. My system NEVER sounds very good when I am under stress or anxiety. Never. I have found changing a cable for evaluation during these times is not wise.  

I am confident many greatly over emphasize the role of expectation bias and have fallen for the perceived benefit of blind testing. Much better to listen over days in your home with your eyes open and shut.

So many variables with blind and sighted A/B testing. Many we certainly don’t even understand in 2022. Give yourself time with the change and you can trust your senses in the end. Give yourself time to know how you engage with the music. How are your reacting to the change mentally, emotionally and even physically? More enjoyable? Less enjoyable? Listening longer or shorter periods of time? More or less relaxed and “into” the music?

Come on children, all together now:’ We all live in a yellow submarine…’

In reality I think it’s all misplaced nervosa.

Where we all want to talk about the war (even if we say we don’t!), in some fashion, but the forum won’t let us.

Even though this is probably the best place for us to talk about it all, as other places are just boiling slug fests where it’s all lowest common denominator, no decent quality of communication, and nothing changes.

Additionally, the societal/economic position/connections and intellect, etc, of the denizens of this forum, makes for a ripple effect in western society that is like 20-50-100:1 greater than any other given similar size or mass of people on a given forum.

And... if there was ever a time for a ripple effect of that nature, it would surely be now.

@prof I wrote the prior response while you were posting your admission. 

Martin and you contribute better posts on ASR than the vast majority.  You don't go off topic and start to talk about pizza toppings, wine, sport cars, soft drinks etc.  Why do you go nuts over information someone with greater knowledge has to offer here?  You'll note that you have been subject to written limitations on topics and criticized for your subjective views.  I agree with those subjective opinions I've read on ASR since a month ago, seeking out "normal" members who can articulate why they choose equipment and music rather than state, its' the best, the cheapest and forget the rest. 

I think my survey of reviews of the Benchmark L4 and your analysis of it and preference for the CJ speaks volumes concerning it's value and quality; however, it also indicates that despite reviewers stating there are no negatives, it is lacking in some factor that makes it less preferential.  You said it was body and warmth.  Same with their older DACs.  However, the older DACs can be upgraded to have that 3 dimensional, full bodied and warmer sound with modification of parts.  The engineering is sound as is the basic construction.  I don't know if the L4 can be modified to sound "better."  If it could, I bet I would like it.  

@prof if this is a rant, we are used to your rants by now. If this is a discussion please post your system photos, components, and measurements in your profile. 

If you are at your end game great, we have a thread here to discuss. If you are stuck on your journey post a concern in a new thread.

@djones51  My mistake, you are correct.  It is Martin who owns and extols the virtues of Von Schweikert speakers.  While searching for the answer at ASR, I came upon numerous Mr. Hooper postings concerning his preference for listening to vinyl and a statement that he doesn't require a huge dynamic range for listening to music.  Assuming that music does not generally require 100+ db swings in dynamics, vinyl playback can be adequate for most music.  (I've heard room shaking deep bass through a trio of Avant Garde Basshorns supplemented with a pair of Rel subs from a Donald Fagen LP under 100 db loudness-it was just deep and tactile sounding).   Bass under 50 Hz is generally limited to mono on most LPs for cutting reasons, so digital can provide stereo deep bass better.  

Yes I’m "MattHooper" on the ASR forum !

If anyone delved in to my posts they will see that I voice agreement with many on the ASR forum regarding the more snake-oil area of audio tweaks, and also the liabilities of a purely subjective approach, while also pushing back VERY often against the more rigid form of "objective" thinking that "if X measures this way it is a poor design" or " vinyl or tube amps are silly" and especially against "subjective impressions without measurements or controls are worthless."

I’m constantly defending the idea that we shouldn’t throw un-controlled subjective reports out with the bathwater, and I argue they can be practical, informative and useful. I'm viewed by some there with suspicion for even having reviewed speakers in the past.  It’s crazy how many pixels I’ve spilled over there arguing for the worth of subjective reviews.

Many people think in tribal ways and refuse to recognize an attempt at a nuanced or balanced viewpoint, which isn’t dismissive of "both sides." Even when we largely agree on many things they are "triggered" by any disagreement and therefore "You aren’t with me, you are against me! You are in the other tribe!"

I get that at ASR and I get that here too. And so it goes...

@noske  we are all willing to help here, start a new thread, post your concerns, we are there for you bro, no worries :)

Amir returned to add his two cents-what his comments are worth here

I found Amir’s many considered comments very informative and valuable. And now they are all forever gone at the whim of AG.

This has happened many times before on this forum.

To my knowledge Amir has ever only deleted one thread.  He may close the occasional one, but is not so rude to just delete.

@td_dayton , I think if you are going to measure you will want to be able to have dsp. You might want to look into the miniDSP Flex or a Paradigm Link Pre/Streamer. The measurements of my room are in my system profile if you want to take a look. I am using the paid upgrade Pro version of Audyssey with a calibrated mic. I needed to combine a well treated room with DSP, not one or the other, YMMV.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/speakers-that-produce-astonishing-soundstaging-imaging.29912/post-1211237

Perhaps I am wrong since I have no first hand knowledge just comparing writing style, but looks to me like Matt Hooper has Theil 2.7 and Joseph Perspective as does Prof. 

@kota1 i personally plan to measure the response in my room at some point next year because i am genuinely curious what's going on down here. as for getting the sound i want, i fooled around with speaker placement and furniture for a solid year and a half trying to get things sounding how i wanted.

am happy to report that i don't have any audible reflection issues at all due to the 18'x6.5' and 4'x6' shelves full of records, the 200lb desk and attached shelf with more records, heavy antique chair, multiple rugs, and the heavy sleeper sofa i listen from. but i would love to have a measured frequency response to reference for when i start seriously looking at speaker upgrades (am in the process of saving now, and will be for a couple more years most likely), and also just because it's nice info to have!

@sngreen The former forum was closed by the moderator. It got rather snarky at the end and discussion was getting off topic (especially after Amir returned to add his two cents-what his comments are worth here).

@djones51 No, Prof is not Matt Hooper. Mr. Hooper owns and cherishes his Von Schweikert VR5 speakers. Prof has Joseph Audio speakers and never mentioned VS speakers in his extensive speaker review on Audiogon. Prof thinks we are all hallucinating if we hear differences (without measuring or blind testing) and think they are worthwhile. Mr. Hooper speaks for himself.

@td_dayton +1, as for the one right way I can't say about components that is true but what about the room? I think a close to a flat frequency response in the room beats willy nilly, that is a constant. 

Art Dudley-I miss him too. (I followed his reviews since the 1990s)  There are so many roads to reproducing music. His reviews were generally full of feeling for the music, music that I appreciate.

I more thing about the Benchmark L4 pre-amp. Four of the major reviews (Stereophile, Absolute Sound, Positive Feedback, Soundstage) had the reviewers extol the superior attributes of the unit at the price. However, none of them indicated they would replace the pre-amps they currently use or purchase one. Reviewers often purchase well reviewed products. This unit got outstanding reviews. Nope, no one purchase it. Why? Maybe the sonic flavor was missing (like warmth or body). I don’t know but based on what Mr. Hooper, two friends experiences with their amp & pre-amp, maybe there is a less perfect pre-amp at that price that is more endearing to the music listener.

Topping DAC versus Benchmark DAC-At significantly higher price, the Benchmark is a very superior constructed unit. My modified DAC, despite it’s ordinary parts, has a dual mono balanced design with linear power supply, nice size transformer and very good quality DAC chips. I forgot to mention how fantastically 3-D it sounds. The downside of the DAC is it’s analog volume pot. Sonically lovely, it has a significant channel imbalance when played below 50% level (measured reviews indicate the amount and setting). Benchmark now uses stepped resistor attenuators to alleviate that problem (The L4 uses 40 precision relays and two independent 256-step attenuators, one for the left channel and one for the right channel).

One other point, I only use balanced interconnects from my DAC as the unit was designed that way and sounds best that way.

i appreciate prof sharing his perspective. the guy is saying over and over that he consciously chooses equipment that "speaks" to him in some way beyond a set of measured specs, and that he doesn’t look at SINAD charts and go "oh yeah that one clearly sounds the best." jokes and differing opinions are all good imho but the way some people have responded to these threads looks like a mirror image of the worst aspects of ASR - the ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, closed-mindedness, tribalism etc.

as for amir i think he’s got an engineer’s brain with a manager’s skill set and he’s been arguing on audio forums for 20 years. thus the certitude, the imperiousness, the unemotional attitude, the hostility towards subjective experiences of any kind, and the (it has to be said) admirable ability to wave away any/everything that challenges his position. this might not be a great set of traits for a scientist, but for a forum poster it’s basically ideal.

anyhow, for my part i’m basically with art dudley on this stuff - there’s no one Correct way to hi-fi, and the people who claim otherwise are just confused

Another pissing contest that will end in the topic being closed.

After reading Prof comments on Audiogon and MattHooper on ASR I would say they are the same person. Seems like a well rounded intelligent fellow who understands the value of measurements but not to the exclusion of what he enjoys. One can like vinyl but understand it doesn't measure as well as digital. You can like tube amps and know they can't measure better than a lot of SS amps. One can understand they are subject to human biases without assuming they are hallucinating, can understand that extraordinary claims that most tweaks advertise should provide extraordinary evidence. 

Those ASR minions are so silly it makes one want to burst out laughing. I am just reading the thread on vinyl referenced above. What an absolute hoot. Then we get this comment: "Oh, science is right out of the window for this thread." I think there is something seriously wrong with them.; perhaps it is low self esteem. That certainly seems to be the case with Amir, as seen by his responses in other threads.

I read five reviews of the Benchmark L4.  Uniformly, the reviewers found the pre amp extraordinary in revealing musical and acoustic detail, without any affectation or distortion, in a finely constructed piece of equipment.  Clean and clear was the universal opinion.

It is on ASR, Matt Hooper's review of it and the Conrad Johnson pre-amp Blind Test Results: Benchmark LA4 vs Conrad Johnson Tube Preamp | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum that I find myself very interested in his keen observations (I used his quote in italics).  The four pages of mostly his observations indicate that despite the super detail, dynamic range and open bandwidth without any negative as to its operation, it is not his favorite to listen to most music and he prefers his Conrad Johnson, with all it's distortion and alterations of the sound.  He prefers a sound with more body and warmth.  Well I prefer my subminiature tube/voltage regulated design pre-amp and I don't prefer the CJ pre-amps or amps I've heard (plenty).  My pre-amp sounds more like an Audio Research SP28 WITH different tubes (6N6 or 6N6).  The stock tubes/unit as is just thin sounding and lacking in the body and warmth department.  I bet it measures better than the CJ and certainly is a more open sound.  With the change in tubes, wow, a totally different pre-amp.

I don't know what is inside of the Benchmark but is reportedly of professional audio quality parts per reviewers.  It may be possible to elevate this to a status which incorporates more body and warmth without losing any of its' measured superior qualities, openness, details and extension.  Changing some caps, regulators and/or resistors.  Or possibly it can't be done and it remains as a finished product with a particular clean, clear sound that is less attractive than other high end pre-amps that may not measure as perfectly.  

So, score 1 for Mr. Hooper whereby he prefers a lesser measuring pre-amp buts enjoys both.   

On the last page, he mentions his love of vinyl.  Score 2 for Mr. Hopper. Immediately, he is warned by a donor member that ASR frowns upon discussion of vinyl records.   Mr. Hooper understands and obliges without pressing the issue.  That's probably why he is still an active member.   Can you imagine if Audiogon members said don't discuss vinyl as a warning, such as that could get one banned from the site?   That's why ASR is so narrow minded.   Don't mention an inferior music delivery format and be careful in your preference for an inferior measuring piece of equipment.   Like there is something amiss not preferring the perfect measuring equipment.   That's where most of the posters here at Audiogon recognize that maybe there are other elements of sound reproduction that are preferred to measured perfection, that are imperfect in some ways.    

Did the original thread max out or was it locked? I kind of missed it.

@prof Your Contemplating Devores forum is 100% subjective, wholly lacking in measurements in your opinions and choices.   What about all the ancillary equipment used to listen to each speaker in order to evaluate them in your room?  (Rhetorical).  

Despite having heard only the Audio Physic, Focal, Revel, Raidho, Paradigm, Monitor Audio and Harbeth speakers you surveyed, I agree with your opinions which I heard under show and/or showroom conditions with varying equipment. Your opinions and mine are wholly subjective.  

You then proceed in the ASR forum knocking the use of listening for differences and preferences as "imaginary" and unreal, listeners self-fulfilling prophesy.  Most of the Audiogon posters here are delineating the problems have had with the ASR site and their owner/many members.  Apparently, you cannot stop yourself from blanket criticizing everyone who posts an opinion on what they hear, even if they have possibly superior listening/hearing abilities than you do.  As to equipment, I suspect you neither construct nor comprehend electronic circuitry/parts use, based on your responses.   

@prof Again, if you read my original comment in the other forum, I was QUOTING from an ASR forum which is printed in italics As to the Benchmark L4 versus the CJ pre-amp, one of the comments was The LA4 certainly isn’t "lacking" anything. It’s just transparent. But I could say it does ’lack’ certain things in the sense of comparison to the CJ tube preamp. My following comments refer to my friends and my experience with Benchmark gear and Conrad Johnson gear in general, with my friends having experience with both companies amps and pre-amps and me with Benchmark DACs and many CJ amps and a few pre-amps. It is our experience that Benchmark products lack somewhat in body and warmth but CJ is dark and covered sounding. We were not specifying that we knew anything about the L4 other than what I read and extracted from an ASR forum. My audio equipment manufacturing friend has seen the insides of several Benchmark products and concurs that they use less than optimal audio quality parts which result in less satisfying audio results.  I was shown the different parts taken out and replaced in both DACs that were modified.  

The fact is you know nothing concerning the interior parts used in either CJ or Benchmark equipment and cannot comment on them until you do. Do you even know the difference between Ultralinear, Triode, Voltage Regulated (some Audio Research gear), Unity Coupled (early McIntosh), etc? I may not be an electrical engineer capable of building equipment but I understand basic circuitry. If you have a Benchmark product, open it up and look up the cost of the capacitors and regulators, then get back to me.

@fleschler 

@prof I NEVER MENTIONED THE BENCHMARK PREAMP OF ANY SORT!!!

Can’t you read?

Yes, I can read.

I also have a memory that lasts more than one day ;-)

Here's YOUR post that I was referring to:

Your words:

"As to the Benchmark L4 versus the CJ pre-amp, one of the comments was The LA4 certainly isn't "lacking" anything. It's just transparent. But I could say it does 'lack' certain things in the sense of comparison to the CJ tube preamp.  Based on my experience with both brands, I found CJ to have a house sound, not one that I or my friends prefer.  The Benchmark, on the other hand, stock is clean and clear but lacking in areas the CJ excels-body and warmth of expression.  

There is a cure for the Benchmark.  Replace the computer quality, cheap-ass regulators, power and filter caps, maybe parts of the audio board, the Op-amp, etc. with audio (much more costly) parts.  Benchmark products are only okay stock but can be great when modified. "

So you literally referenced the LA4, mentioned it's "stock" sound and went on to explain the "cure" being higher quality/more expensive parts.  EXACTLY what I was addressing.

An apology would be nice, if you are up to it ;-)

Question, someone spends $20K on a system and the other guy spends $50K.

The guy that spent $20K has components that measure meh, but his in room system measurements are ideal.

They guy that spent $50K has pristine component measurements but his in room system measurement is meh.

Whose system will likely sound better?