Hi Paul,
Sure, and if you read my last post again, I didn't say that they weren't
However, we are in agreement here:
And here:I use computers, and mics, and measurement of other sorts, and my ears, and maths....and I even have a pencil sharpener somewhere (unless the dog's eaten it). Such facilities are to be embraced and used properly. The ears are vital to judge the finished article and to "visualise" in audible terms things like whether one has got things like resonant control and decay of enclosures correct, whether things are phase correct, whether the polar response is nice and smooth, yet for all this, we have measurements which tell us enough about all of those things to get it right.
Indeed. Measurements are necessary and fine up to a point, but *in the final analysis* we must trust our ears.One thing we have to take care about is generalising simply on the standpoint of what is used for PART of the design. Technology allows for greater refinement and reduced R&D effort which is a good thing but ears are always the final arbiter.
Essentially, after it leaves the test bench and passes technical scrutiny with flying colours, the final 'voicing' of any piece of equipment or speakers must be performed by using the ears of a human being, as whatever it is being produced will ultimately be bought and listened to by a human being, not a computer, so on that point we are in entire agreement
As for your other comments about certain speakers heard at shows, I have no problem with anything that you wrote. However at the end of the day, all you can do is tell it as you hear it - and have heard it on numerous occasions - and for me, regardless of anything else, the 'voicing'/presentation of a lot of modern speakers and equipment, regardless of how well it measures, leaves a lot to be desired.
Marco.