I would like to make an editorial comment about the direction(s) that audio is heading:
I think that the quality audio that I have known and loved for the last 45 years, is splitting into 2 separate directions of 'development'. These are: good sound, mostly, and good looks, mostly.
Looking at the pictures of the Munich Audio event in May, shows me absolutely beautiful displays, rows of turntables with shining chrome and clear plastic, huge loudspeaker arrays, and external finishes 'to die for'. BUT what is 'under the hood'? Are each and every one of these designs built with the highest audio quality, or is it just an 'ego statement' of a well to do, audio producer? I wasn't there, so I cannot say, BUT the amount of treasure invested in the LOOK of the designs seems out of balance, to me.
On the other side, there are people, both amateur and professional who are still trying their best to give the best sound possible, with a healthy nod to an attractive case, to overcome the WAF, at the very least. However, these people are attacked by many, even on this website, as being foolish 'subjectivists', who actually trust their ears, when 'everybody with a scientific bent' KNOWS that the ear can barely tell the difference between anything and can be easily fooled, as is often shown in scientific tests.
These people don't seem to easily talk to each other, even here.
I attribute this to the takeover of the AES by the 'objectivists' back in about 1980, forbidding publication of many 'advanced' concepts, that may have kept us on track in audio design, and continue maintaining an environment where the 'obs' like Dr's Lipshitz and Doi, could interact with 'subs' like Doug Sax, or me, for example.
This 'objectivity' has taken over a major segment of discussion, yet can we not just LISTEN and decide for ourselves? I don't mean just 'personally' fawning over our latest construction project, like a proud papa, but with the help of others in the industry, as well, to further instruct us as to what we did 'well' and what is lacking. This, coupled by more advanced measurement techniques, looking for what we have overlooked, would get us to make better products AT ANY PRICE POINT, because we could learn what to AVOID, as well as what to improve.
This separation in audio today, puts one group in the purely subjective, throw money at it, camp, that is sometimes very successful, but mostly so so, and the purely objective, if I can't measure it, AND its distortion is not more than Dr. Lipshitz thinks is important, then everybody who finds it lacking is just being foolish.
What good it that?
In has been my experience that there are differences in audio components that are not always easily measured. Without listening, unfettered, to these audio components, making direct comparisons to other designs, both old and new, leaves virtually no direction to go in audio design. Yet, I still hear the differences, almost as easily as when I first started 45 years ago. There is still lots to do.