I would like to tap into the historical knowledge of the group. Back in my twenties I was a hungry enthusiast and a devout reader of Stereophile Magazine. I recall Bob Carver's challenge to the Stereophile staff that he could build an amplifier that would exactly equal in total sound the best amps being made at the time at a fraction of the cost.
Stereophile took him up on his challenge and I seem to recall they chose an anonymous high end amp which was later identified as Conrad Johnson as the target. They both agreed upon a fairly complicated null test that would identify any differences between the amplifiers and used a 3rd speaker that would literally replicate any sound, including any distortion, between the two amplifiers.
Initially the difference between the two amplifiers was very obvious when heard thru the 3rd speaker, however after a couple of days of tweaking, Carver was successful in producing an amplifier that passed the null test, and the resulting amp was later mass produced as the Carver Magnetic Field M-1.5t amp.
Even the writers for Stereophile had to admit Carver's success. I also recall Carver claimed by using this same process he could replicate any high end amplifier being made at the time, including any tube amplifier.
It first seemed that this "experiment" might be an industry game changer, but apparently it was not? So the question is why not? Was it considered "unethical" to take a high end amp created from many hours of R&D, and simply duplicate the sound by trial and error? Or do audiophiles just like spending more money on their gear for bragging rights? So educate me.
