I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.

 Then I read that he didn't even bother listening to the darn thing.

Why would he bother with listening to this amplifier? 

 If something measures so poorly, wouldn't you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear?

Not particularly, this amp was given a not recommended not so much because it could be differentiated  from other amps if kept within it's limitations but because it wasn't considered a good buy and the engineering of the thing is a bit weird. 

Do people still buy gear on measurements alone?

Yes, I do. They can tell me enough to know what I want to consider. I've yet to listen to a component that measured well and sounded bad, but I only consider this with speakers as amps, Dacs, etc.. are commodities I can look at the numbers and know if I want it and they don't have to be that great since the speaker and room will swamp the electronics in terms of audible distortion.  

I don't understand the gripe with ASR, if you don't like their approach then don't pay attention to it. From my reading on their site they pretty much ignore this place try to do the same. 

It's easy to "fool" oneself on a blind or short-term listening session. That is why the gold standard is long term evaluation. It's very hard to convince yourself somethings sounds good after you have experienced all it's flaws

ABX and blind tests are the platinum standard. Sighted tests are dismissed as irrelevant, no way to have a control for bias. I fail to understand this idiotic aversion to science.  

To me ASR does pretty good with DAC measurements and Speakers, especially since he got the Klippel. 

Who dismissed science of how we hear? The plascidity of the brain? Certainly not me. For instance do speakers " break in" or does our brain adapt to the sound of the speaker room interaction. Looking at the components of a passive speaker there’s very little that would benefit from break in of more than a few minutes to a few hours but it can take our brain a few days or weeks to adjust to a change. I agree there are far to many who reject science not only of how things work but of how we work as well.

Again, I can't speak to all o, buy my understanding of their position is that as imperfect as present measurement protocol is, if that is even an admitted liability, it is still superior to the most skilled listener in ascertaining component and system sound quality. The senses are not and cannot be relied upon vs measurement.

I consider myself entrenched in using objective measurements and I agree you can't paint all with the same brush but this isn't my position as far as someone building a system they enjoy. 

I didn’t respond as I didn’t see any relevance to audio much less anything at all. Looked like quack nonsense to me. 

I didn't say you were a quack. I said those videos looked like quack nonsense. I didn't understand what they were talking about or more precisely didn't follow close enough to care it looked beyond any relationship to this thread.

Sound/music is caused by vibrations.