[Audio_Empire[_2_]]

In article ,
Andrew Haley wrote:

Scott wrote:

High end audio community doesn't have a say so in submitting to real
scientific scrutiny.

What does this mean? That high-end audio enthusiats can't do things
scientficially? because the priesthood will come and get them? Or
for some other reason? That only real scientists can perform
experiments?

It means that rigorous scientific controls are rarely, if ever applied to the
audiophile community and often when such things are tried, it is usually in
search of some agenda, and not in search of some truth which can often
be inconvenient at best.

No: the whole point of science is that if an experiment is done
properly the results will be valid no matter who does the experiment.
You don't even have to own a lab coat. All you have to do is not mess
it up.

In the case of audio, that's more difficult than it might seem on the surface of it.

By the way, the man you quote, J Gordon Holt was pretty much the
inventor of subjective audio reviewing and never used DBTs in his
protocols. he also reported hearing differences between cables and
digital playback devices. Go figure....

And he saw the light. Good for him.

Now that is one absurd piece of jactitation. You have no idea of the context
of that comment, nor do you know what motivated it. To assume that the man
saw some "light" by making a comment that agrees with your preconceived
notions is most dishonest. You sound like a religious zealot here!

Andrew.