[Neil[_9_]]

On 12/29/2014 3:20 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Neil" wrote in message ...

This is what I call the "Floyd fallacy" -- the belief that testing
listener preference gives you useful information about the /quality/
of sound reproduction. Count Floyd has built a career around this.

Why are you conflating "preference" with "quality"? See above.

I'M NOT.

Do you (meaning everyone reading this) see why I get so exasperated --
ANGRY -- at people's illiteracy -- their utter inability to read and
understand plain English?

READ THAT PARAGRAPH OUT LOUD. What does it actually say?

Was your above "stand-alone" paragraph the only comment you presented,
it would probably have been ignored as another pointless diversion.
However, in context, it is clear that *you are the only one in this
discussion* that is using the statistical results of the presentation to
infer something about audio quality. NONE OF THE REST OF US ARE DOING
ANYTHING OF THE KIND.

On 12/29 @ 6:51 AM, William wrote, and the inference in question began:
"I'll say it again -- when anyone comes to the conclusion that
two-channel, two-speaker stereo is about as good as you can get -- you
know something is wrong. Badly wrong."

No one but YOU asserted such nonsense, and its intent is unmistakable.
The rest of your comments in that post only strengthen the inferred
relationship between preference and audio quality, and Luxey's comments
in that post and my follow-up posting clarified that the statistical
results simply reflect the preferences of the sample group. THAT IS THE
CONTEXT of your "stand-alone" paragraph, above. As expected, the result
was yet another ridiculous attempt at obfuscation. Got more? Bring it.
--
best regards,

Neil