"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...
I don't believe that the usual suite of bench measurements
characterizes an
amplifier, except to exclude "rejects." It is apparent to me
that an
amplifier can measure decently, and sound different from
another decent

Can you explain why this is apparent? There's been no published
evidence (or theories) of amplifiers with audibile differences
where the differences couldn't be identified via measurement.

amplifier, and this has nothing to do with "magic", or
"musicality", or any
other nonmathematical property. But audio amplification is such
a backwater
that enough money hasn't been spent to figure out how to
measure amplifiers.

No one needs to spend money. Amplification is a basic function
spanning hundreds of fields since the triode amplifier was
invented in 1906. We know how to measure amplifiers.

I'll admit there are many strange audio amplifiers around...but
measuring isn't a problem.

The reason high-end audio amplification is so backwater is the
consumer base. Can you imagine these advertisements, "IBM's read
head amplifiers in our hard drives add a warmth to the GMR field"
or "NASA has upgraded the servo positioning amplifier of the
Hubble Space Telescope to give that low end boost missing from
other tracking systems". With their educated customer base
they'd be laughed out of existence.