Stereophile has long had this schizophrenic aspect where the auditions are
contradicted (or complimented) by the measurements. It is entertaining.
Years ago, they ran a cover with the headline: "If one of these amplifiers
is right, the other must be wrong." One amp was a huge, powerful Krell. The
other was (IIRC) an 811-based Cary single-ended job that developed maybe 10
watts. The Cary couldn't pass a symmetrical waveform; the Krell was
virtually perfect on the bench. Both were declared to make their own brand
of magic. 

The subjectivity of art doesn't rest well with the hard science of
engineering. Professionals aren't immune to that dichotomy. If I did what
Jamie does, I would certainly aim for his level of objective rigor.
Microphones in an acoustic space, like phono cartridges and loudspeakers,
are a whole different story, a blend of subjective/objective. At least we
now have other elements of the signal chain that can be reliably objective,
if that is the goal.

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dave Cawley
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 7:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] a prime case of why subjective reviews of audio gear

From:  Dave Cawley
Dartmouth  United Kingdom

Hi Tom

Rely to fixed (again), although it is really a server issue............

I agree with all you say, especially the midnight part !  However some
magazines do no testing at all.  Image a car magazine not testing 0-60 and
top speed ?