"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ink.net...


The people endorsing ABX have results to show for their efforts. The
other side has.....?



.... a system they enjoy listening through.

But it might be possible to have the smae sound for less money or it
may be possible to have a better one. Likely as not given that there
are so few differnces, no change would occur.

"Better" is in the eye of the beholder. "Better" is what you think
sounds best. I prefer whatever sounds best when I am listening for
enjoyment,
not what sounds best when I am engaged in a rigid test environment.

How do you know if you've never bothered to try?

Suppose for the sake of discussion that you found that you could save
several hundred dollars by doing DBT? Wouldn't it be better to have the
same sound from your electronics and have extra money left over to put it
wher it really counts, with a better quailty speaker system?

First of all, my time is valuable.
There goes the several hundred saved right there.
Also, I doubt that I could improve my speaker situation
for under $5,000, maybe even $10,000.

What speakers do you own?
Have you seen the new NHT Digital speakers in the current issue of SP?
At $6000.00 for the system, they look to be worth every penny, although
there are some very impressive conventional speakers for less than 5K.


Anyway, if I went back to sighted and the 'favored' component
still sounded better sighted (despite sounding the same blind)
I would select the favored component.
I'm not sure I believe you. I think that despite all your protestations,
you are in fact smart enough to know that the illusory sonic improvements
you might perceive from a sighted comparison, are just that.