@amir_asr Then what is @soundfield talking about when he says you have never participated in a blind test outside of your own?

First thing you want to learn that nothing AJ tells you is the truth unless you verify it yourself. I don't know anyone who sacrifices the truth to serve his agenda more than him.  And his agenda is that nothing in audio makes a difference other than I guess speakers.  He used to walk the halls of forums and stomp on you repeatedly if you dared to say otherwise.  I came into the picture and he repeated the same.  The problem for him was that I am a professionally trained listener in addition to knowing the technology whereas he is none of that.

He would challenge me on audibility and I would routinely show him that with tests put forward around that time that his assertions were completely wrong.  That I could, in computerized automated double blind tests, I could pass them.  That would cause him to blow a fuse and accuse me of teaching.  Those accusations were as empty as his inaudibility claims.  I explain this in detail in the video I post above.  Here it is with the timestamp:

https://youtu.be/0KX2yk-9ygk?t=1561

Above I show how you cannot just edit the output of these ABX programs due to cryptographic hash in the newer version.  He also accuses me of watching an analyzer while performing the test.  This is completely silly as real-time analyzer is not going to let you pass many of these tests such as the high-res one where countermeasures are in there to assure that very thing.

Bottom line, he likes to create FUD around anyone who can create these tests as to claim there is not ever any audible difference in audio no matter what.  Pass a test like this and you must be a cheater.  Well, no, he is the one that is the problem because there are reasons why one can pass these tests and not everything presents an inaudible difference.

Mind you, AJ himself has never taken a single test.  He has no training or again, knowledge of technology. So I can see why it is miraculous to him that someone can pass these tests.  But that is his problem, not mine.

BTW, I am not the only one passing these tests.  The late Arny Krueger and friends created an ABX test of amplifiers showing them to have audible differences.  

Double Blind tests *did* show amplifiers to sound different

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/double-blind-tests-did-show-amplifiers-to-sound-different.23/

If you don't know Anry, he was a staunch objectivists who like AJ, believed you all are wrong about hearing any differences between just about anything.  Kind of like AJ but less ruthless.

Bottom line, don't listen to AJ.  There is a reason I threw him out of ASR even though he claims to be a hardcore objectivist.  See how he doesn't even post measurements of his speakers.  When facts go against his stance, he all of a sudden pretends facts don't matter.

@soundfield you heard the man. Show us some measurements. It is odd I couldnt find any checking now. 

To be fair to both of you, you both are to me, the worst that audio has to offer. Neither of you have provided answers. 

@amir_asr still hasn't answered why he closed the thread. AJ needs to post some proof his speakers are worthy of ASR. LOL

@amir_asr ​​​​​​

Double Blind tests *did* show amplifiers to sound different 

Do you believe the same about cables? 

@amir_asr You remind me a little of a very good friend of mine who is a highly respected mechanical engineer. My friend is 100% certain that all cables sound exactly the same, and that there is absolutely no reason to spend money on power cables that are anything beyond a certain gauge necessary to supply enough current. I have had him over to listen to my system and to tell me if he can hear differences when I swap in cables. My friend tells me that he can, but these things are all due to his poor memory of the sound before and after, plus he believes that only a ’blind’ test would allow him to state that there are no differences.

This is the thing, I have run into many folk who are not that much into music, and as such their interest level in this hobby is minimal, at best. They like other aspects of sound reproduction, maybe they enjoy the technical aspect ( like the well known gear designer I referenced in a prior post, who hated music), or maybe they like the visual aspect of the gear, but the actual reproduction of music and the ability of the gear to get us as close to possible to what we hear as ’live’ is not something they truly value. It is my belief that you are a techie first, second and foremost...and that music really is not that high on your list, you just like the science. Maybe i am wrong about you, but to me ( as a musician and an a’phile), your ASR forum is one of the last places I would want to be, because the folk that seem to post there are absolutely into the tech side-- and really not the music.

BTW, you state that if a speaker measures poorly and sounds great, then the measurements are in fact what we need to be looking for and as a result are good? I submit that the measuring devices are simply not able to measure the very thing that makes the speaker sound great to the listeners ears, instead measuring aspects of the sound that do not correlate with what we hear. This is something that I know you will not accept as a possibility.

This is the thing, I have run into many folk who are not that much into music, and as such their interest level in this hobby is minimal, at best.

Which couldn't be farther from truth for me.  I got into hi-fi in 1960s when I was barely a teenager.  I love music and aspire forever for perfection of its reproduction.

They like other aspects of sound reproduction, maybe they enjoy the technical aspect ( like the well known gear designer I referenced in a prior post, who hated music), or maybe they like the visual aspect of the gear, but the actual reproduction of music and the ability of the gear to get us as close to possible to what we hear as ’live’ is not something they truly value.

I don't know anyone like this.  Every audiophile regardless of which camp they are in, share the love of music with interest in audio hardware.

It is my belief that you are a techie first, second and foremost...and that music really is not that high on your list, you just like the science. Maybe i am wrong about you, but to me ( as a musician and an a’phile), your ASR forum is one of the last places I would want to be, because the folk that seem to post there are absolutely into the tech side-- and really not the music.

Your belief is an insult and attempt at misdirection.  The largest thread on ASR Forum is about music we enjoy: 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/what-are-we-listening-to-right-now.40/

It has *930* pages currently.  It is linked to from the home page as a feature.  When I went to Pacific Audio Fest last week, one of my top goals was to gather what music was being played and share it with the membership.  Much new music was discovered and members went as far as creating playlists for them.

I assume you also like to listen music although I don't recall ever hearing you discuss that on either forums I have known for you.

What is different between us is that I am dedicated to understanding the technology that produces music.  This is enabled by me having professional experience as both an engineering and trained listener for literally decades in audio.  While you were perhaps spinning an LP, I was streaming music from cloud and reading research papers to advance my knowledge.  You sit there and hypothesize what makes a difference in sound reproduction.  I get to test literally thousands of pieces of new audio and get to talk to top luminaries in our field.

You talk about cables making a difference.  I have tested a number of them and not just by measurements but performing null tests with music.  The difference is nothing.  Not a thing.  The engineering says they shouldn't make a difference and they don't.

The fact that you hear a difference is because you are a human.  I too hear such "differences."  But just like your friend, I know that our hearing is variable and bi-directional.  Our brain can instruct our hearing system to dig in deep in music, or not.  Certainly when sitting back and enjoying music,  you are not doing that.  But when you compare things, you allow your brain to hear things differently in A vs B.  When that happens, you think there is a difference even when there is none.

We can prove the above just like you friend said: take away your eyes and knowledge.  But you didn't want to submit to that test, did you?  Fact is that you don't want to know.

Mike Lavigne whom you know, swore that he could easily hear the difference between his MIT Oracle cable and another one.  When tested blind against monster cable, he failed miserably to tell them apart.  

"in my mind i am not confident that i will ever be able to hear reliable differences between the Monster and the Opus to pass a Blind test. OTOH i am also not sure i won't be able to do it.""

Take away his eyes and all of sudden his ears don't do what he said they do.

You walk around claiming that some knowledge of music creation helps you with magical powers when it comes to sound reproduction.  That against incredible body of audio science and engineering, you know better.  Well fine.  Do the blind test with your friend and repeat 10 times and see if you can get 9 out of 10 right.  If you are unwilling or can't pass the test, then please spare the insults that those of us who believe in audio science somehow don't enjoy music.  

Really, I expected more from you.  Much more.