I don't have a technical background and I used to read a lot of audiophile press. I believed in burn in, PRAT and the like.
My road to Damascus moment was coming across issues of "The Audio Critic" online. It was quickly obvious to me that they were writing about real effects and making testable statements within a coherent system (of course with the expected amount of uncertainty) and that this made so much more sense than the subjectivist rags ever did.
Peter Aczel's (editor) standard stametement on amplifiers is a great example:
"In controlled double-blind listening tests, no one has ever (yes, ever!) heard a difference between two amplifiers with high input impedance, low output impedance, flat response, low distortion, and low noise, when operated at precisely matched levels (±0.1 dB) and not clipped."
(https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/critic1.htm)
Every part of that is well defined and the claim would be easily falsifiable.
My road to Damascus moment was coming across issues of "The Audio Critic" online. It was quickly obvious to me that they were writing about real effects and making testable statements within a coherent system (of course with the expected amount of uncertainty) and that this made so much more sense than the subjectivist rags ever did.
Peter Aczel's (editor) standard stametement on amplifiers is a great example:
"In controlled double-blind listening tests, no one has ever (yes, ever!) heard a difference between two amplifiers with high input impedance, low output impedance, flat response, low distortion, and low noise, when operated at precisely matched levels (±0.1 dB) and not clipped."
(https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/critic1.htm)
Every part of that is well defined and the claim would be easily falsifiable.
