AudioBanter.com - View Single Post

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
I hope this e-mail address of yours works because I just sent some .pdf
files that were sent to by Sean Olive that clearly indicate that B&O,
NASA,
and Nokia all use ABX.

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Arny Krueger wrote:
"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net wrote in message

2500 lines of posturing, fer chrissakes. Shut up, Mikey.

Thanks for showing once again that you can't tell the
difference between audio knowlege and posturing, Middius.

Nice to hear from you, Arny. I've been looking for your contribution
to
the "The case for ABX..." thread. I thought you might be unwell or
on
leave but I see that you let your flock take the grapeshot. Well an
ArchPriest has to save his irreplaceable self.
Your answer to Middius allows two interpretations: 1) you do not
understand that "posturing" refers to Nyob's appropriating a serious
article 2) You're up to your debating trickery which I continue to
think is not worthy of you.
As for Ludovic needing lessons from fatuous NYOB in the value of
double-blind testing{ For the umpteenth time:1) I was doing DBT
medical
research before any of you heard the name. Medical DBT research can
be
validated by objective data (psyche is an exception) 2) DBT is
DBT,
ABX is ABX 3)

ABX is a double blind protocol used by people doing audio research
from
the
BBC to Nokia, to Bang&Olafson, to Harman, to hearing aid companies,
and
on
and on.

I use blind technique sometimes myself when I listen to a
new component. Not yours but mine Left-Right method.4) But when it
comes to invalidable preferences in musical reproduction I'll take
eg.
Holt's opinion sighted any time over NYOBs nth power seventy times
blind.

Take whatever you want you still haven't a clue about ABX for audio.

5) Research is another matter entirely: double blind provides
uniformity. I need no convincing from NYOB.

You mean you've finally accepted that ABX is a valid protocol used to
test
for subtle audio differences?

But I would like him to
stop conflating DBT and ABX - assuming that he is capable of
understanding the difference.
Ludovic Mirabel

I know that ABX is a form of DBT, something you don't seem to get.
It is also a widely used and valid protocol, something else you don't
seem
to get.
__________________________________________________ _________

ABX is a double blind protocol used by people doing audio research
from the
BBC to Nokia, to Bang&Olafson, to Harman, to hearing aid companies,
and
on
and on.

BBC-- no. Quote documentation and show me for a liar or you for a
...what?
B&O- no. Ditto, Ditto, Ditto
Nokia that famous audio company uses it for comparing cellphones or
what? Documantation?
Harman -no. Ditto, Ditto, Ditto
Have you got the distinction between DBT and ABX clear in your head
yet?
NYOB, NYOB, you make my day.
Ludovic Mirabel

__________________________________________________ _______

.
This was the exchange on Nov 16th in this thread. There were two
postings by NYOB
The first one can be looked up in that thread just above this one.
NYOB:
ABX is a double blind protocol used by people doing audio research
from the
BBC to Nokia, to Bang&Olafson, to Harman, to hearing aid companies,
and
on
and on.
I answered:
BBC-- no. Quote documentation and show me for a liar or you for a
...what?
B&O- no. Ditto, Ditto, Ditto
Nokia that famous audio company uses it for comparing cellphones or
what? Documantation?
Harman -no. Ditto, Ditto, Ditto
Have you got the distinction between DBT and ABX clear in your head
yet?
NYOB, NYOB, you make my day.
Ludovic Mirabel
In response I got 2 postings . The first one can be read entire in the
thread. Even with "hiddeb text" it would make this too long for one
posting. Below is my response to the two.

You are my one and only, inimitable, incredible, fatuous,
transsubstantial NYOB.
With a wave of your wand you transport me to the "Alice in Wonderland"
country. Whuite Rabbits, Mad Hatters all over the place.
So far you produced some 60 phony references to the good, old
Humpty-Dumpty ABX.
This is the latest one- 7 meters long.. Ther was nothing about ABX in
most of those , except for a few of them with a negative, "no
diference" component comparisons.There is not one word about ABX in
this one. The closest it gets is an incomplete DBT. Quote.:
" It was not possible to carry out the tests entirely 'double-blind.
Inevitably, the project team would know which loudspeakers were
being
assessed. However, only one member of the project team remained
in the
room to supervise the tests - to ensure that the test subjects did not
confer or try to look behind the screen to identify the loudspeakers.
That
person was often actually unaware of the loudspeaker manufacturer
because code
letters were used to identify the loudspeakers. In any case, under the
pressure of physically moving the loudspeakers and setting the levels,
the members
of the project team had little time (or inclination) to take note of
the
identity. The supervisor was also under strict instruction not to
exhibit any reactions."
End of quote.
In the 2nd posting wrote:
I hope this e-mail address of yours works because I just sent some .pdf
files that were sent to by Sean Olive that clearly indicate that B&O,
NASA,
and Nokia all use ABX.

I got by email 3 Acrobat attachments about a research project. I
didn't read it in detail but it seemed to have nothing to do with
ABX-as usual.

Thanks for admitting you don't try to find the pertinent references.

Who cares what it "indicates" to NYOB? All we need is
just one paragraph: "We used ABX as testing method with this
result:..."

All of those attachments had something to do with ABX.

NYOB- I get enough unasked for garbage by email as it is. You're
welcome to wish me a Merry Xmas but if you have a contribution to a
forum discussion publish it in the forum. Having to cope with offers of
Cialis, penis enlargement and young women pining to entertain me I get
enough tempting spam as it is.
Secondly: If you found something about ABX (or whatever interested you)
publish the quote with a reference not the whole bloody paper to waste
time on for no benefit.

You won't have to worry, since you are completely dishonest on thesubject of
ABX and DBT, there's no reaosn to talk to you about it anymore. Yo already
know that it's used by nearly everyone sho does any kind of audio research,
denying it doesn't change that.

You could e-mail Sean Olive and find out far more than I can tell, you, but
you won't

If you had ever tried to publish a scientific
paper you wouldn't get very far if you snowed the editor under with
your complete copies to wade through Soon you'll be copying books in
the forum.

Instead of talking about papers I'm not going to write, you'd be better of
reading some that have to with the subject you claim to have some interest
in.

It is difficult to fathom what motivates you.

I like to show fools that they arn't fooling anybody.

I doubt if you're
sophisticated enough to be just an ordinary liar. I'm considering
several hypotheses: You have problems with simple verbal comprehension-
you fall asleep before you get to the end of it- you think I'll fall
asleep- which is it?
No further response to further pointless mailings. Go in the corner and
mouth: "I'm not a liar. Ludovic is a liar if he says I'm a liar.
Ludovic Mirabel

We all know what you are Ludo.

**** off.