wrote in message ...
Harry Lavo wrote:

In this test. That's all you can say for sure. However it is not an
uncommon phenomenon in abx testing. Sean Olive reportedly has to screen
out
the majority of potential testers because they cannot discriminate when
he
starts training for his abx tests, even when testing for known
differences
in sound.

Sean Olive doesn't do ABX tests. He doesn't "screen out" potential
testers, either; the article Sully referred to used a couple of hundred
listeners. What he has done is assembled an expert listening panel,
specially trained to identify specific differences in frequency
response. That's a tough task, and not everyone can do it, even with
training. But it has nothing to do with either ABX or preference
testing.

This is the second time in a week you have misrepresented Mr. Olive's
work, Harry. I suggest you ceasse referring to it until you learn
something about it.



Sean and Harman don't do ABX tests? Perhaps you should check that out with
your buddy Stewart. Here is one of many quotes from his postings:


"Difficult to pin down a post from that tiny quote, but I have
personally experienced numerous positive outcomes from ABX testing,

"*as you are well aware* and of course it's a plain fact that Floyd
Toole and the boys at Harman International get positive results all
the time, otherwise they wouldn't use it as a development tool (along
with KEF, B&W et al).

"Since I have stated all this before on several occasions, your wilful
ignorance of it does raise a question of 'cherry picking' only those
results which suits your preconceptions.

"The plain *fact* of the matter is that ABX is a very sensitive tool
for *revealing* subtle differences, which is why major corporations
use it as a development tool. "
SOURCE:

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: (Stewart Pinkerton)
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2002 18:24:43 GMT

Subject: HOW TO GET A POSITIVE ABX TEST.




Harman's involvment with ABX has been discussed here for years. Here's a
quote from 1998 from *somebody* you might recognize:



"In article ,



"Trotsky wrote:
Jacob, the ABX company went out of business years ago. You would think an
idea that has this much relevance to Audio Reality would have companies
lining up to license this technology, but in actuality all you have is a
bunch of guys in southern Michigan trumpeting the joys of the ABX
alternative lifestyle.


"References to ABX and ABC/hr tests have been posted here. The
companies cited include AT&T, Harmon, CRC, Swedish Radio, and others.
Standards orginazations cited have been MPEG-Audio, CCIR, and others.

"Your failure to read citations has no meaning, and reveals only your
failure to do your own homework.
--
"Copyright 1998, all rights reserved, except
transmission
by USENET and like facilities granted. This notice must be included. Any
use by a provider charging in any way for the IP represented in and by this
article and any inclusion in print or other media are specifically
prohibited. "



SOURCE:

Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: (jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist)
Date: 1998/09/02
Subject: ABX Practice and Usage. I quit because the discussion
ended two posts ago with personal attacks.



If Sean is screening for the ability to discriminate specific frequency
response emphasis, then it is for discrimination tests, right? No different
than training to hear codec anomalies. And what are the two leading audio
discrimination tests? ABX and it's close cousin ABC/hr.

Sean's work has been discussed here and elsewhere on Usenet for many
years(*), as the quote above from J.J. shows, and unless everybody involved
in the discussions has been in error, Harman uses discrimination tests.

And BTW, I wasn't referring to "the article Sully referred to". I made a
general reference to Sean and Harman-Kardon. Perhaps you should read more
carefully.

(*) A search for "ABX" and "Harman" brings up 109 posts.