A local magazine reviewed recently the H95 against Atoll IN200, NAD C388 and Rotel RA1572MK2. Their measurements were not exactly similar (they measured SNR, THD, IM etc... from speaker outputs using both analog and s/pdif inputs), but as far as I can see, their measurements do not contradict with amirm's measurement. They did not measure/review the headphones amps.
When it came to subjective listening based verdict, the reviewers were quite happy with the Hegel. This made me think, where are the limits in measured deficiencies after which we can reliably hear them? I think it is obvious that the H95 performance s nothing special, especially considering the price, but then again, is it already good enough in the sense that improvements in technical performance would not mean significant improvements in what we can hear?
Now, don't get me wrong. I can appreciate the engineering excellence manifested in an equipment with superior objective measurable performance. I'm just wondering that purely from the listening point of view, where's the level that can be judged as "perfect 10".