"George Middius" wrote in message
...


Don Pearce said:

That isn't "scientific" though, is it? It's clearly not double-blind.
And it
sounds time-consuming. How many switches would you have to do to achieve
a
statistically meaningful result?

If you mean people in lab coats, no. It is plenty scientific, though. And
to keep it double blind, just leave the room while the chap changes the
cables, and have him leave before you walk back in.

Christ. Why bother?

How many switches? Make it fifty or so. If the cable differences are truly
audible, then getting forty right should be no problem. That would be
statistically a very significant result.

Fifty trials to determine if two cables can be distinguished? That's
several
hours of "fun". I'd say screw the "tests" and buy the one you like for
whatever
reason. Do you even know what hobbies and listening pleasure mean?


You do that a couple of dozen times, then you compare your list with the
list the guy plugging in the cables has.
You then publish the results in Stereophile (because that is the august
journal you work for), and apologise for all the bull**** you printed in
the past.

Love that scientific mindset. ;-)

You never knew science could be so easy, did you?

I do resist science being harnessed to the yoke of ideology. But my
background
may be different from yours.


No I mean the argument that says you can get better sound by spending a
thousand bucks a foot on boutique cables.

Why do you care who spends their own money on that stuff?

We've been here - I'm just nice that way.

Why don't you devote your efforts to a real charity that benefits people
with
real problems?


like a 90 day mental treeatment plan for Arny.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----