Mark DeBellis wrote:

Sorry I guess I didn't explain my idea very well. Suppose that in
order to perceive the relevant property a listener has to hear an
uninterrupted stretch of music from the same source. That is, suppose
the relevant property is not a property that belongs to any short
snippet of the signal but is rather a property that belongs only to a
whole, longer passage, say 5 mins. in length or a whole movement.
What I am thinking of here is the SACD vs. CD issue discussed on
another thread. I am wondering if the unit over which perception can
differ meaningfully can be an extended passage not a brief interval;
if so, my switching back and forth between SACD and CD would not be a
relevant test, because I would hear neither SACD nor CD as an unbroken
extended passage. I guess I am asking basically whether the existing
protocols for audio tests make room for the possibility that there can
be auditory perception of properties of longer, extended passages, and
are sufficient to measure such perception.

Yes. There's nothing that would make a DBT involving full 5-minute
samples invalid. However, there's also no reason to think they would
work better, as I noted yesterday.

(To be completely accurate, the protocols DO require that the subject
have the ability to switch any time he wants. But there is nothing that
requires him to switch more often than once every 5 minutes if he so
chooses.)

Perhaps the answer would be that there could not be a difference in
perceptible properties of longer passages without a detectable
difference in frequency response, which could be heard in quick-switch
tests; but is that obvious?

Yep. And you're more likely to notice it if you switch quickly and
frequently between choices.

bob