[KH]

On 9/29/2013 7:40 PM, Audio_Empire wrote:
In article , KH
wrote:

On 9/27/2013 4:04 PM, Audio_Empire wrote:
In article ,
ScottW wrote:

snip

As has been stated often before, all that is required are "subjectivist"
audiophiles who *know* they hear a difference between two components,
sighted, to participate in DBT's of those two components. If they can,
with proper controls, reliably identify these, typically, obvious
differences, then voila! Done. If not, the DBT protocol has
successfully removed the subject bias.

Obviously, it easier to prove that subjectivists can hear no differences
in a properly set-up DBT than it is to prove that objectivists CAN hear
differences when said objectivists DON'T WANT TO hear differences. In
the former case, the DBT should be able to eliminate biases. You can't
pretend to hear differences when you don't know what you are listening to.
The results should prove you wrong every time (if you are merely determined
to hear differences whether they exist or not). OTOH, a subjectivist whose
agenda is to not hear differences can fool the system by merely reporting
that they heard no differences on any try and there is no way for the statistics
to trip them up. You can't prove a negative, after all.

Well, that does assume a level of malfeasance on the part of
objectivists that is not in evidence. But again, it doesn't matter.
You need only test the subjectivists that "clearly" hear a difference to
establish efficacy.

snip
That, unfortunately, is very often *not* the case. Even when a placebo
is used. It's a function of the "power" of the ample size, and often
requires a very large population (hence the extremely high costs
associated with them) to demonstrate statistical differences. Most
results are not binary (i.e. responds/does not respond).

There are exceptions to everything. Obviously I was generalizing here.

Just pointing out that your generalization is misinformed. *Far* more
often one drug is compared to another, not a typical placebo control group.

snip
As I've posted here before, I know the physics involved in wires, and
*know* that wire is wire in audio situations. I have also been in
sighted wire demonstrations by AQ in which I clearly heard a difference
between zip cord and AQ wire. Single blind at home - zilch, as
expected. The brain is a wonderful pattern processor and difference
engine, and will always try to discern a difference between stimuli.
Sighted testing simply doesn't work to discriminate subtle differences.

And DBT is unreliable because the bias controls are only effective for a
positive result, not for a null result. So, what does one do?


Really? What makes you think this? Bias controls are applicable and
effective no matter what the test result. You assume that there must be
a positive result to verify the efficacy of the controls, but that
simply isn't the case. And once again, *all* that is required is to
test subjects that, in open evaluations, hear differences that *should*
(based on physics and engineering principles) not be there. If they are
detectable in bias controlled tests, they are audible. If not, then
it's clear that bias is involved.

Keith