"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 12 Sep 2005 03:58:58 GMT, "Harry Lavo" wrote:

" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...
" wrote in message
...

snip


If you self-appointed 'scientists' want to run such experiments, do
so
on your time and your dime.

The scientists who do these kinds of tests are the movers and shakers
in
the
filed of audio, not just hi-fi but all areas relating to sound
perception.
They use double blind protocols because they want valid results and
they
know they can't get them from sighted lsitening.


Please note that at least some of these "mover and shaker" scientists
specifically exploring the reproduction of music (as opposed to codecs
and
telephone transmission) give great attention to physical and
psychological
comfort, eschew short snippet testing in favor of comparative-monadic,
and
have found they can validate differences when a conventional
short-snippet
test resulted in a "null".


Please list them.

Tsutomu Oohashi, Emi Nishina, Manabu Honda, Yoshiharu Yonekura, Yo****aka
Fuwamoto, Norie Kawai, Tadao Maekawa, Satoshi Nakamura, Hidenao Fukuyama,
and Hiroshi Shibasaki

Ah yes, the notorious Pioneer-backed attempt to prove that we really
need 100kHz bandwidth. Got any Europeans or Americans?

Actually, Stewart, if you looked further you would find that Oohashi and
many of his team have been doing work in psychoacoustics and neurophysiology
for many years and are well published. Put you chauvinism aside, why don't
you.

Moreover, your assertion that Pioneer funded the research is just that, an
assertion. No proof has ever been offered or cited. It may or may not have
been funded by a consortium...but if so, that is common practice in many
contries, including Great Britain and the United States. Was JJ's work at
AT&T invalid because it was privately funded? The validity depends on how
well the study was done and the results, peer-reviewed.