to correlate with subjective findings for electronic components.
While I am not a big reader of JA measurements sections it does seem to me that his technical evaluations of speakers carry more hints of corroboration with subjective findings than those covering amplifiers, pre-amplifiers, etc. So why not use speaker measurements as alternate, or supplementary measurements, for those electronic components, the measurements of the speaker amplifying the minute and subtle but real effects of the electronic components that gives them their unique sonic signatures.
This would involve comparative analysis with control device(s). For example, to 'test' an amplifier we gather speaker measurements using a control amplifier. Then we introduce the DUT (other amplifiers), produce the measurements, and compare. Might we be able to deduce things like ... compared to the control our DUT appear to exhibit:
. more/less energetic bottom-end response
. greater/lesser dynamic response speed
. greater/lesser this, that, the other thing, etc., etc.
I'm out on a limb here, to say the very least, but the perhaps the premise ... might indirect measurements from a device (speaker) that has some hope of correlation to subjective findings be more meaningful than (or at least complement) primary measurements? ... is comprehensible?
What do you think? Inspirational spark or just plain dumb?