prof
But I don’t see how we can get anywhere the way this is going because
you just keep asserting claims when I’m asking what justifies your
claims.
Most users here base their observations on listening. Beyond that, no one is obligated to provide scientific theories for what they hear, or provide the results of scientific listening tests they've conducted, or measurements they've made of the equipment under evaluation. This isn't a scientific group. This is mostly a hobbyist's group and if you seek hard data, this simply isn't the best place to find it.
Of course, every reader is free to accept - or not - whatever claims are made here to whatever extent he likes. But the seemingly endless demands that posters provide upon request some set of scientific data to accompany their listening observations isn't going to get anyone anywhere.
In addition, I suspect most members of this group don't even know how to set up a scientifically valid listening test. I base that on the claims by those who say they have conducted such tests but - upon being questioned - reveal that the test was flawed from the onset ... which makes it probably worse than no test at all.
