[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
On Dec 1, 3:02?pm, Steven Sullivan wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message

On Nov 30, 8:32?am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
wrote in message



No. But I did see the obvious anti vinyl bias in such a
broad sweeping claim. Perhaps if you had done the
comparisons with bias controls in place I might have
taken your assertion more seriously.
Single blind tests = essentially no adequate bias
controls.
That simply is not true.
Nobody has taken single blind tests seriously since Clever Hans *talked*
back in the early 1800s.

They have their limited uses -- there are experiments where the
experimenters cannot eithically 'blind' themselves, e.g. sham surgery.
But for experimetnal psychology, DBT is the way to go.

For experiemental psychology peer reviewed publication is maditory for
initial acceptance of any data or conclusions among scientists and
academics. Is this the level of rigor you are suggesting should be
applied to audiophilia? The same as experimental psychology?

If the standards of proof of 'audiophile' claims are to be lower, then
let's acknowledge that the chance of its claims being false, are thereby higher.



--
-S
I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can
seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit
the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have
woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life -- Leo Tolstoy