I was reading Paul's rebuttal where he attempts to dismiss the value of measured fidelity, and suggests that less than accurate measurements are superior, and therefore we shouldn’t trust the best measurements. It’s the oldest parlor game in their playbook, so let’s break it down for the absurdity that it is.
He mentioned that they did a complete benchmark on their new Steller phono stage and that it initially measured as transparent, but only for it to fail in some sort of admittedly less than controlled listening test done by some sort of professional “listening team.” He goes on to mention that this "listening team" (not identified as scientists or engineers) explained to the engineer (who is an engineer) that he had to adjust feedback loops, and bias that would provide a preferred coloration. It was only at that point that it sounded better to the “listening team” with, again, their admittedly less than controlled listening test.
Nearly all exotic component and cable makers beg the question as to how their offerings could come close to being universally beneficial, especially when they are always subtle. Of course, they would want their products to be sold to as many customers, so any offering would need to be as close to universal as possible. However, claiming to be able to do such with a subtle coloration raises a litany of questions.
Since PS Audio has supplied us with a subtle coloration that they think is superior, let's review some colorations in audio reproduction that are not subtle, but will instead be audibly and measurably gargantuan;
1. Speaker selection
2. Room, and room treatment selection
3. Listener hearing health (which is determined by disease and or age, not the presence of "golden ears")
4. Where the speaker and listener are positioned and located.
5. Media selection
I have no doubt that a tone adjustment (when I say tone, I mean any diversion from transparency), in some fashion can have an isolated benefit; with one song, played on the same speakers, in the same room, and listened to by the same person etc. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising for that one person to even pass a DBT in this very narrow hypothetical experiment.
These situational variables change from user to user because their environment will certainly differ across the board, let's remember, each one of those changes are not subtle, so this should be enough to reveal their carnival con for what it is, but here's the kicker; number 5, media selection. This is the caveat that the typical pseudoscience promoter will assume that no one stops to think about, and they might even be blind to it themselves. As Alan Parsons once said, "an audiophile is a person who uses your music to listen to their gear."
These marketers are trapped in a snare here. It's all about selling gear that is supposedly better and better; spend more get better. Get this new design, it is more revealing than last year, etc. Music media has no recording, engineering, and production standard, or anything close to it. What if the musician, engineer, or producer also likes that distortion effect made by eliminating whatever feedback loop that PS Audio’s “listening team” suggested, and incorporates that into their recording? Well you've just added more, and the result of this nonadjustable, undefeatable tone control not only harms fidelity but creates a new coloration, and a new coloration every time you change the record.
How do these folks believe they can add subtle coloration that will remotely be universal in reproduction? Here's what's more likely the case. The coloration provided while likely audibly different, doesn't provide a genuine preference. This would have been clear if the PS Audio “listening team” used properly controlled testing. Not only DBT, which Paul dismisses without reason. I'm sure I could guess as to why since the typical audio pseudoscience promoter has the same reasons; usually dubious unfounded claims of listener stress among other things. However, a proper test would also be level matched, and with immediate switching etc that he never mentions.
PS Audio keeps their change subtle so that it's merely noticed if it is even noticed at all. They can market their change as being purer, (and they do) since in their fantasy world, the less feedback loops the better, which is a typical misguided claim from more than one manufacturer. Or, since their customers typically believe from their own long road of false discovery, that their uncontrolled listening can be done without bias, (which is impossible) they will associate that subtle change (assuming it’s there) with some sort of opinion in regards to preference due to conscious and subconscious bias that can’t just be turned off; it has to be controlled.
It’s clear from the review posted below that there is very little audible deviation from the most linear and transparent with this absurdly priced, $2500 phono stage, at least when properly used. It has a very powerful output stage, and three adjustable gains and MC/MM selections depending on which cartridge used; none of which justify such a price tag. With the gain turned high, a coloration presenting a second order harmonic is provided that is still 55 dB below the fundamental. That is nearly inaudible, and with a gain that high providing a higher noise floor, that will be more audible. For the record, modern day DSP plugins can provide any level of harmonic colorations you’d like for a fraction of the cost.
So, like any other claims of preferred colorations, and system synergy, they are revealing the obvious. They seek to create a wallet worm which suggests that only product selection matters while begging the question that everything else is somehow more or less constant. The customer gets comfortable with the false idea that all gear, theirs included, is deficient in some way, and needs to be optimized with surrounding gear, which is also deficient, but when combined, the audio fairy will visit at night and bring them into sonic bliss. Holding aside the absurdity of this Rube Goldberg tone control, the fact that sound can be transparent from the source material, to the speaker terminals, with far more affordable gear, is a concept they seldom realize or quickly dismiss when suggested. Eventually the customer wants something different, like speakers, or moves into a different house, and the whole carnival con comes back to town with the same plan as last year; to take money from the customer’s wallet and put it in their own.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ps-audio-stellar-phono-phono-preamplifier-measurements