I said


I am not so convinced it is a snap to do them well. I think if
Stereophile were to do something like this it would be wise for them
to consult someone like JJ who conducted such tests for a living.



Arny said


JJ was a free agent for a while after Lucent fired him, and before Microsoft
hired him. However, JJ seems to be too much of a closet golden ear to be as
aggressive and pragmatic as scientific objectivity demands.


That's a load of crap. Unlike you, he made his living at it.

Arny said

This allows him
to curry favor with the golden ear press which he actively did for a while.


Nonsense. It is his professional pedagree that gives him credibility.

Arny said

Yet he talks the talk, maintaining a veneer of scientific respectability.


No, he simply is respectable scientifically.

Arny said

Hey, its what he seems to need to be comfortable.


No, it was what he needed to do his job all those years.

Arny said


It's not that tough to DBT just about any audio component if you are
pragmatic enough. JJ's incessant public mindless and evidenceless criticism
of PCABX convinced me that he's simply not pragmatic enough to be worth much
trouble.


So said the novice about the pro.

I said


I think DBT with speakers and source components are
quite a bit more difficult.



Arny said


Shows how little you know, sockpuppet wheel.



Nonsense.


I said


Would you limit such tests to
verification of actual audible differences? Personally, I like blind
comparisons for preferences. They are more difficult than sighted
comparisons for obvious reasons.


Arny said



Preference comparisons make no sense if there are no audible differences.
There are two major DBT protocols:


No **** Sherlock. No one said otherwise.

Arny said


ABC/hr for determining degree of impairment or degradation, which roughly
equates to preferences if you presume that audiophiles naturally prefer
undegraded sound or sound that is less degraded or less impaired. Since
there are so-called audiophiles who prefer the sound of tubes and vinyl
which can be rife with audible degradations, its not clear that one can
blithely presume that all audiophile prefer sound that has less impairment.



One can do preference tests blind the same way they do them sighted by
comparing A to B and forming a preference only without knowing what is A and
what is B. One can from a preference regardless of your hangups and do it
without the effects of sighted bias.

Arny said



The tools for doing DBTs of just about *everything* are readily available,
presuming that the investigator is sufficiently pragmatic. Since we're
talking religious beliefs, we can't presume pragmatic investigators in every
case.


We are not talking about religious beliefs here unless you insist on inserting
your religious beliefs. We were talking about the practice of subjective review
by a particular publication


Arny said





In the case of Stereophile, the use of DBTs would no doubt embarrass the
management and many of the advertisers. Therefore, Stereophile has maximal
incentive to be as non-pragmatic as possible. They simply behave
predictably.


So says the novice who thinks he is objective. You wear your prejudices like a
badge.