So who are the subjectivists around here?
Those who believe that all amps, preamps, and DACs sound significantly different, separates and integrated amps sound much better than AVR, no AVR could possibly power speakers that have minimum impedance of 3 ohms, and passive bi-amp significantly improves their speakers?
Good amps, preamps, and DACs don't sound significantly different, usually. There are some pretty big differences when you are at the extremes of technology ... I don't think anyone would expect a 2A3 Single Ended Triode Vacuum State amp would sound the same as a Bryston 4B Cubed, or a sat/sub system to sound the same as full-range electrostatics, to name a few examples.
Most people have a certain quality they prefer in reproduction and in that case the choices they reasonably make are not going to be "night and day"; in most cases differences will be first just discern-able and then you have to decide which you prefer from there. When you find you can no longer decide, well, you've probably found the candidates you should buy and also probably at that point have the luxury of choosing based on price, appearance, physical size, and so on, versus sonics.
There's a reason why subjective reviews utilize a robust specialized language with specific meaning, because that's how you review similar items, be it wine, or which model pickup to buy from the same manufacturer or which motorcycle to consider. If you don't know the language, you won't get anything (or much) from an audio review, a wine list, or an enthusiast's automotive blog.
It seems to me that it's the language, and not the subjective review itself, that people have the most trouble with. What is seemingly a large difference to someone versed in the nomenclature of the insider may be subtle or mis-understood to the novice ... what is a "note of cinnamon, blueberry and sage" supposed to do to help me have some red with dinner if it all just tastes like red wine to me? When my subjective wine language goes "subtle hints of vinegar" versus "a little less subtle hint of vinegar" and ends there?
Let's face it, the difference between good and great Sound Quality isn't even obvious to most people, unless they are somehow exposed to "great" at some point, yet to most of us it is quite obvious. That carries on as someone is exposed to better and better gear, regardless of whether it can be afforded or found (some brands have very limited distribution; how do you hear something with eight dealers nationwide and you live in Bozeman Montana)?
Maybe a little anecdote is in order. Many years ago, I'd heard a lot of HiFi and had no trouble deciding which system I preferred, but if you demo'ed two amps to me, I'd probably just pick the cheapest one and walk out of the store with a new box. I am into HiFi, I am listening to lots of stuff, I can hear a little more bass in this receiver and a little sweeter cymbals in that one, but if one cost a few bucks more than the other, I could happily live with the cheaper variant.
Then one day, I heard it. The amp that changed my life, basically. Now, just leaving it at that, obviously the difference I heard that day was, to me, huge. If you asked, I'd say exactly that. But to someone with less experience with different gear, you know, they'd say it sounds "nice" and that's that.
The amplifier was the Threshold 400A, pure Class A (although I had no idea, up to that point, whether that made any difference) and plenty of power and a firm grip on the loudspeaker, but with super realistic vocals, cymbals, Hammond B3 organs, whatever.
And from that point I started to listen for the things that I heard the Threshold do, and all of a sudden I can hear how lesser amps don't do things I know the Threshold can (and I'm not saying less expensive, although it was more obvious with less expensive stuff).
It's a journey. We live in an age when even bad sound is tolerable to most, and I can make out who's playing and get into the qualities of the song on a $100 blaster 20 feet and around the corner while putting up siding on a house. It doesn't sound "terrible" unless I compare it to something that truly excels. I might be sick of hearing "Jingle Bells" in about three weeks from today, but it's not the Sound Quality that causes me to run from the store screaming (just kidding). But ask 10 people to describe that Sound Quality; they don't have the language, there is no reference point to compare to (most haven't heard a truly great system, ever) and they probably have no idea what is possible sound-wise today.
That doesn't mean if I were to describe the Sound Quality with the agreed-upon language, that it's not relevant or descriptive to another who knows the same language, and even though the store's Muzak system through 70-Volt Ceiling Speakers purchased from the lowest bidder does sound "night and day" worse than even an inexpensive portable, not everyone would understand what I meant by that.
Someone mentioned the room acoustics as an area that should be addressed before some tweak is tried. Well in some cases the room can't be changed. We don't all live as kings in our Castle, families are families and have to agree to room treatments. Maybe they don't.
But consider, what if the budget is such that you have to do room treatment in stages. A little here, save up a bit, a little there, save some more, and so on.
The difference between "no treatment" and "full on treatment" may be very obvious. The proverbial "night and day". But how many people would hear the incremental changes done one at a time?
Another perspective: just about anything you do to a room will change the sound. Move a book case from one wall to the next, the sound will change. Toe in the speakers a bit, the sound might change quite a bit more. Remove a plush chair and replace it with a table and lamp, and the sound changes again.
Probably, with something like Anthem Room Correction, you could measure all of those changes. Some people could hear them, some not so much. Just because some tweak or change in non-component accessories causes a change, does not mean it's not subtle, and does not mean the change is for the better, it's just different. But it's not reasonable to say there was no difference when there was one.
There is another thing that could be at play. There is a well known, repeatable and consistent phenomena in the game of Golf. A player with some skill buys a new set of clubs, and almost immediately his game will improve. *
A few dozen rounds later, his game starts to devolve back to his old handicap. He is not as aware of the subtle changes the new clubs impose, and starts to overthink the stroke, gets a little more uptight, over-compensates, his game starts to go backwards.
Now, put the new clubs back in the garage, and take out the old set. What happens?
The very same thing; his game improves, he starts to over-think the problem, gets a little more uptight, and the score starts to revert to his natural handicap.
It happens in a lot of sport, especially with someone whom is highly skilled and the small changes are more obvious; a hitting slump in baseball, dropped passes in football, shooting over the crossbar in hockey. It happens to everyone at that level to a certain degree and at certain times.
To him, the issues are huge, the changes in his performance loom large. If you were to engage in a pickup game with him, though, he would still be the way-above-average skill player he always has been to you. And you may walk away from that game amazed as to what is possible in sport, having been exposed to a new level of performance.
Now you can see what is missing in your own game, and even in your highly skilled amateur friends, and the differences are now "huge" in comparison.
* This sells a lot of golf clubs. Can you think of a corollary in Audio?
