Then do it and publish the whole set of measurements that correlate to everything relating to real signal reproduction, and get it certified by an official committee like IEEE, or get this place certified. Otherwise all what you say are just superiority claims, in the air, by someone with a know-it-all attitude. The current set of measurements published here are not "conclusive" of music reproduction, even within audible parameters.
Also stop putting your interpretations at the end of a measurement. The measurement should be self explanatory. If you want to explain it, explain what each says in a separate page, along with all the threshold limits and weights as per audibility test, get that information certified and let the viewer decide. Anyone who is about to base his decision on a squiggle should know what each squiggle means and how much is the threshold in each. You shouldn't have to dumb it down for them, often leaving out things and making a carefully biased description, that's not science.
You obviously never read my comments on measurements like from this device and other decrapifiers did you ?
A: They are not complete as NO EMC testing is done and only some specific tests are done on specific cases only.
Then you need knowledge to interpret that correctly which the vast majority of readers can't. A handful perhaps.
B: There can be situations it does something. Tightening of bass, smoother treble, better imaging is not one of them. These are descriptions everyone uses whatever is changed always leads to those conclusions.
C: If the guy is interested in HOW to test (most really are not) then I will gladly tell him. The fact that 'testing blind' is not saying anything explains enough to me.
You don't need ANYTHING to be certified at all in this particular case (someone making a claim). This is not something needed for a paper or scientific research. This is about testing something like the jitterbug at home in normal circumstances with the ONLY difference being the jitterbug is in or out of the circuit and the listener
not knowing if it is in there or not.
It has nothing to do with thresholds, measurements, interpretations, perception, committees, certifications, calibrations etc.
It's not about science and the plots and which squiggle says what or not either.
You also cannot expect non initiated people in measurements to understand measurements and be conclusive for the majority of people NOR do I expect it to be. It is absolute BS to say measurements should be self explanatory and conclusive. They are and can be in the electrical plane to those who actually use measurements (on a daily basis or not)
The measurements done by
Amir only show differences in the analog domain right before it is amplified in his lab conditions (which I don't know). It shows no audible difference on the used equipment. It does not mean it won't do 'something' in the digital waveform at all nor in all circumstances or test circumstances. In this case, in the end all that is important is whether or not the audio output of the (tested) DACs show (meaningful) differences. It is not about possible groundloops, common mode currents or other things in the case of the jitterbug. It is just a filter in the digital path that should affect the analog output of the DAC. The tested DACs clearly show it isn't of any influence in the tested DACs.
Just telling something 'works' for them and we should believe them on their blue eyes when it is quite easy to prove to THEM selves is NOT science... This is far less 'science' than the measurements itself is it not ?
It is more scientific to prove something TO YOURSELF using a better testing method than to just accept it. That's what my reply to you was all about. You can easily test for
yourself IF something like this actually works by simply removing the 'knowing' part. This will be very conclusive in that case and is really easy to do but involves someone else and no peeking.
But since you made it personal...
This is not my website, nor is it my responsibility to explain measurements.
All I can do is comment and when someone asks for an explanation give one or suggest an alternative way of testing or post something I think is relevant.
Please tell me.... When you have moved your speaker do you measure it with certified equipment and do you need confirmation it is moved and how far away from the original point and have that certified by using tons of measurements using calibrated equipment ?