Here's the difference:
Your score with new set of clubs is an OBJECTIVE measure.
Putting a $400 power supply that makes things worse, from a manufacturer that obviously has no testing/evaluation/analysis going on, into a system and loads of people anecdotally crow about all the veils lifted, better imaging, separation, better extended highs, when we KNOW that measurably the output of the DAC is degraded at best tells us that subjectivists aren't hearing what they think they are and at worst, giving their sighted word credence? They like noise.
The golf score is only one potential objective measure, and if examined is not even objective; it's just a score in a game, which, if it were objective, would instantly kill the betting industry.
What does the number of strokes in a game have to do with your skill as a golfer, when it isn't consistent from day to day or year to year? If you go to a Golf Pro to have your stroke analyzed, he asks what your handicap is and more or less from that point ignores it, as he analyzes what you need to improve and uses his experience ... a subjective value ... to determine what should be improved.
He doesn't measure your improvement by your handicap, he measures it by your form, your hitting power, the way you are able to hit the virtual screen, and so on, by observation. The handicap is akin to the weight of a component ... it's factual, it's measurable, but it isn't an indication of quality beyond some vague previous results, which can be invalidated with a change in tech (Class D, anyone?).
Even professional golfers don't hit the same on the same course with the same weather and course conditions on consecutive days, nor do they have as good a score from course to course comparative to other pro golfers.
Golf scores can vary widely, yet the player's skill remains essentially the same, with only statistical analysis to create some kind of useful measure. What use would an amplifier power rating be if it changed every day, or relied on the mental mood of the equipment (I know equipment has no moods, but if they did, as athletes do, the power rating would be useless as an objective measurement).
The golf score is akin to measuring some value in audio equipment that does not translate to actual performance; such as measuring the dimensions of the device, or measuring total harmonic distortion which has only a casual relationship to sonics (only useful for culling the truly bad gear) while ignoring the harmonic structure of that distortion, which does have an impact on sonics. Even if a measurement can be said to be objective, that does not mean it's actually useful. On the other hand an amplifier with a known threshold value THD that is too high is confirmed by subjective listening, which isn't an argument against the value of subjective listening, it's a confirmation.
Just because someone has made a subjective assessment, or failed to do so, does not invalidate those who are skilled at it when physical elements, experience and training are prerequisites to being actually useful at it. It's a skill, and must be learned. The bozos at CNET might disagree, since they fancy themselves valuable audio reviewers simply because the device plugs into a wall or uses battery power, and that's their area of expertise and experience, while others who are actually skilled at audio evaluation laugh at their mid-grade (or worse) audio sensibilities.
Just like choosing an appropriate measurement criteria, subjective evaluation can be done well or can be done poorly.
I've met many people who judge audio gear solely by the spec sheet and the test results, and ignore the subjective review or the opinions of skilled listeners. Their systems all sounded, well, not "bad" so much as disjointed and offering performance far less than well chosen gear would have done for the same cash outlay. Isn't getting maximum value for your dollar the point of visiting sites like this one? It can't be done with numbers on paper alone, sorry to say.
A Note: with regard to the OP's post, I have tremendous respect for Amir and his seemingly vast knowledge of circuits and measurement techniques. But he's not Mutt Lange or Keith Johnson, who can hear if a musician twisted one of two dozen effects knobs a quarter turn, and can know which of the two is best. We need both types in audio, but you can only learn so many skills in a lifetime.
