Why don't you listen to amplifiers or DACs then if I may ask? Wouldn't a listening test be a good empirical check if the measurements are correct in assessing preferences in their case as well?
If I understand that correctly, since JBL 305 and KEF LS50 have the same score, in their case there would be equal chances of being preferred, right? Aren't KEF speakers much better speakers than JBLs, do you really think guys that majority wouldn't choose Kef when given such an alternative?
"KEF speakers are much better speakers than JBLs" is a value judgment based on brand awareness, perhaps. I would not necessarily choose KEF over JBL--it would depend on many other things as well.
For example, I love my Advents but am always looking at speakers. One particular pair of relatively inexpensive Revel tower speakers came to my attention. Yes, they measure pretty well. But much more important to me was their bass response and their maximum SPL capabilities. So, I looked at the user manual, and discovered that they can be biwired in ways I had never thought about. One method was "vertical" where two stereo amps are used. Each amp drives the woofers out of one channel and the mid and tweeter out of the other channel. The other method was "horizontal", where one stereo amp is used to drive left and right woofers and the other stereo amp is used to drive left and right mids and tweeters (which is the more common way). In both cases, the amps go through the internal driver filters (aka crossovers), so as long as the amps are identical, no external crossover is required. Thus, I could use my current pair of stereo amps, which I now use to drive two pairs of Advent NLA's. The amps are not bridgeable, nor are they particularly happy with really low impedance despite their high-current designs. Do I want extreme channel separation as with dual monos? Or do I want the bass amp to be uncluttered by the requirement to drive the mids and tweeters (and vice versa)? Those speakers are designed to give me that choice. I found myself in deep lust after those speakers just because they would take advantage of my two unbridgeable amps. But all that makes no difference at all if they measure poorly or wouldn't physically work in my room.
I've owned a lot of DACs, ranging from ChiFi cheapies to one found on the Stereophile Recommended list (though still a budget DAC). They all sound the same to me, comparing a CD rip (through one DAC) to the CD itself (through a different DAC). I trust my ears, too. If I heard a difference where what we know of psychoacoustics suggest I shouldn't, then I would first have to prove that I can hear that difference consistently and repeatably. Blind testing is one way to do that. Then, we can explore what is insufficient about the measurements. But we can't complain that the measurements are inadequate until we can demonstrate that our perceptions are repeatable, and not dominated by what we already know about what we are listening to.
John Atkinson tells a story, which I mentioned in (what I hope is) a different thread, where he participated in a blind test and discovered that he could not tell the difference between good amps. So, in a fit of penury he sold his whatever and bought a different whatever because it was cheaper (the different whatever may have been a Quad). He then found himself not listening to music as much, so he went back to the first whatever amp. Then, he found himself listening happily again. This tells me that the visual and the prior knowledge about an amp is an important factor in our enjoyment. The placebo effect is real, when it comes to perceptions. There's nothing wrong with that. But it is not instructional to others. I did not respect JA any less because he admitted preference for an amp that did not sound better to him in controlled blind testing. In fact I respected him even more.
Rick "who'd be buying those Revel speakers if he could think of a way to arrange tower speakers in his open-plan music room" Denney