I actually believe that the objective (technology) and subjective (ear) sides do converge, eventually. In the late 60s, when transistors were being introduced to the consumer market, many noticed that these solid state units measured much better than their tube predecessors, but many also noticed that the tube stuff sounded better. IMHO, the conclusion isn't that one side was wrong; they were both right, the more accurate conclusions are: the ear is an excellent judge of sound and the technology of the day wasn't measuring the right parameter(s). Fast forward to the present and will are still having the same debate. As jstang stated "technology and your ear should always agree"...ideally, yes, but in some cases what we measure is inadequate (e.g., THD) and in other case it is sufficient, depending on the question, e.g., What is the residual ripple by using this size and type of capacitor in this circuit?" Both approaches have to utilized to get best out of any piece of equipment. An obvious example is the development of capacitors, the Elna Silmic II and Nichicon Muse capacitors benefited from the technology needed to develop low ESR capacitors, high ripple tolerance caps, vibration resistance caps...etc.. and their parameters are chosen and optimized for the use of these caps in the signal path use.
