Good, Marc @poseidon77, let’s agree to disagree.
These proposed tactics are not meant to be a validation tool for truth claims at all. They are the dance that is called for in order to successfully engage with complex systems (aka the listener’s mind in relation to hifi). They are a blueprint for going about our hobby - much like the Bayesian approach @Zapp put forward.
You might enjoy reading ‘This is your Brain on Music’ by neuroscientist Daniel Levitin.
It appears that it requires a certain level of contemplative experience to appreciate how very different our individual minds are. The usual view is ‘Mind? Yeah, it thinks, so what. It’s just a function of the brain anyway…’ Both not true. The reality is more complex, less reified. Western philosophy is limited in its scope here. That’s because the interesting findings come from insight beyond cognition.
Frequency range of hearing as an example for variability between minds is orders of magnitude smaller than the actual differences. The differences matter, because the way my mind interacts with my ear consciousness can very well be so different from yours that we both can truthfully describe the opposite experience (hearing improvement, not hearing improvement). Our moment to moment perception is grounded both in mental dispositions existing since birth and listening experience acquired during our lifetime. Moreover, what I listen for in music reproduction will almost certainly be different from what you listen for. Those are the real reasons why we have these debates. No illusion involved. My firm belief is, that dead parrots, miracles, rainfall, butterfly effects, wearing tin foil hats and so on are not considered an ingredient by any participant here. In other words I believe in the basic sanity of all involved. Plus experienced audiophiles know biases, self delusion and so forth and account for them. BTW, we are not debating coffee makers or pebbles in relation to hifi, we debate a component that is a direct part of the audio chain.
Unfortunately it is only hypothetical and I am back to personal experience. If you @poseidon77 and @Zapp came over we could compare. The cumulative differences in setup would be switch + LPS + power chord and maybe ethernet cables. I would change more than the switch, because then it becomes really obvious. All of the above changes should make no difference, because it’s IP traffic. So I believe all would be permissible in a test setup. I am confident both of you hear the improvement. If not, you would each get a box with six bottles of Louis Roederer.
Actually, in terms of testing there is little to lose but time and effort. Procure an audiophile switch (Melco, English Electric, Innuos), get a good power supply (Keces, Ferrum, Paul Hynes), a decent power cord and power distributor and try. The achievable result is a more natural, analog sound. Less of what is attributed to ‘sounding digital’. It won’t make a Bartók a Rossini. But if one enjoys the sound of vinyl, it’s worth considering.
If the only alternative to debunked is illusion, testing a switch upgrade is a waste of time. I give to consider that the comfort of the armchair might be the wrong place to resolve the issue…