On 18 Jun 2005 22:46:39 GMT, Gary Eickmeier
wrote:

Mark DeBellis wrote:

It would not solve the problem because once you had listened to the
first passage you would have to remember the property for the duration
of the second passage, and I am hypothesizing that you don't have
reliable memory for that. That is the problem.

OK, so let me get this straight: You listen to one component, hear
certain properties, then listen to another component, and hear certain
other properties, but by the time it's all over with you can't remember
which was which? This pretty much dooms any listening test, doesn't it?
Not sure I see the point of your question.

It is that the test would be inadequate to measure the detection of
said properties.

The background to this is that I said I thought SACD sounded better
than CD, and Chung suggested that I try a simple blind test, to see if
I could reliably identify which was SACD and which was CD (after
matching levels; SACD and CD layers of same disc). Indeed I could
not, at least on one set of trials. Should the conclusion be that
SACD sounds the same as CD? Or is it possible that the test I applied
is inadequate in some way? How *could* it be possible that the test
is inadequate? My question is basically an attempt to explain how
that might be. Suppose when I am listening to recorded music (1) I
hear properties of temporally extended passages and (2) I can't retain
a memory of those properties long enough to make a comparison, if at
all. Then I could have perceived different things, although this
difference would not show up in the kind of test I performed.

Mark