"jeffc" wrote in message
. ..

"j." wrote in message
ps.com...

I would also think that it takes some time to get used to the sound of
a system anyway, and I doubt DBTs are long enough to allow for that
(also because of cost). ...but that's another argument and I'm sure
I'm going to catch enough flak for this one already

It's not "another" argument, it's THE argument, just that no one gets it.
DBT *is* the way to go, just not the way most people think of doing it.
You *should* be able to live with your equipment and listen to music over
a long period of time in the privacy of your own home, and at the same
time it should be one long DBT.


Right, the *whole* purpose of having a stereo is to do
one life long DBT with it.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

"jeffc" wrote
"j." jason.burrows wrote



I would also think that it takes some time to get used to the sound of
a system anyway, and I doubt DBTs are long enough to allow for that
(also because of cost). ...but that's another argument and I'm sure
I'm going to catch enough flak for this one already

It's not "another" argument, it's THE argument, just that no one gets it.
DBT *is* the way to go, just not the way most people think of doing it. You
*should* be able to live with your equipment and listen to music over a long
period of time in the privacy of your own home, and at the same time it
should be one long DBT. Such a thing isn't impossible, just exremely
inconvenient. But it can easily be approximated with willing participants.
It really doesn't have to be double blind, only single blind, with
participants who are really willing to get at the truth. It would be
extremely easy to hide a couple amplifiers away somewhere you can't see
them, and have a partner switch (or not switch) them over the course of a
couple months. You could do the same with a CD player, but you'd need a
very active partner (like a slave or butler). With speakers, it would be
much more problematic.



jason said:

" I would also think that it takes some time to get used to the sound of
a system anyway, and I doubt DBTs are long enough to allow for that
(also because of cost). "


jeffc said:


" DBT *is* the way to go, just not the way most people think of doing it. You
*should* be able to live with your equipment and listen to music over a
long
period of time ..."


"... at the same time it should be one long DBT. Such a thing isn't
impossible, just exremely inconvenient."


"... and have a partner switch (or not switch) them over the course of a
couple months. "


Not only would this couple of month worth of switching and twitching exremely
inconvenient, it is also bordering on lunacy.

DBT requires that you set aside your personal preference and biases.
How would you both suppose to prevent these after acouple of month's worth
of faithful listening (and then switch n twitch in between) among components
under test and then reliably id aural diff at the flick of the switch while
ensuring that both your biases and preferences wouldn't interfere with the
ability to select the difference having attentively listened to both unit for
two
month?

Let's assume that after a couple of month, you both were able to reliably
determine sound differences, how did you ensure that personal biases
didn't come into play having thoroughly listened to both unit for two
months?

j. wrote:
So lets say that no one is able to reliably tell the difference between
speaker cable A and speaker cable B in a DBT. Lets also say that no
one is able to tell the difference between amp A and amp B in a DBT.

...but what if enough of these things added together does produce a
perceptible difference?

How can it? If A=B and C=D then (A+C) = (B+D) = (A+D) = (B+C)

There are no degrees of "No Difference."

WIRE = WIRE !!! (It's simple Math)

"Annika1980" wrote in message
oups.com...

j. wrote:
So lets say that no one is able to reliably tell the difference between
speaker cable A and speaker cable B in a DBT. Lets also say that no
one is able to tell the difference between amp A and amp B in a DBT.

...but what if enough of these things added together does produce a
perceptible difference?

How can it? If A=B and C=D then (A+C) = (B+D) = (A+D) = (B+C)

There are no degrees of "No Difference."

I don't think you believe that. There are rounding errors. A human cannot
detect a volume difference of .001 dB. That should be obvious. Increment
it 10,000 times, and just as obviously, humans can detect it. That was an
extreme example.

j. wrote:
I've looked around a bit for this, and it seems it must have been
mentioned before - but I think there's a pretty compelling argument as
to why double blind tests aren't always the be all end all. (yeah,
this could get bad - I'm no expert, this is just a thought so be easy
on me)

Using DBTs we can determine what the smallest difference a human is
able to detect is. For example, slight changes in pitch or volume.
There is a level that is small enough that the person is unable to
detect the difference, but at twice the change the person can tell the
difference.

So lets say that no one is able to reliably tell the difference between
speaker cable A and speaker cable B in a DBT. Lets also say that no
one is able to tell the difference between amp A and amp B in a DBT.

...but what if enough of these things added together does produce a
perceptible difference? (Obviously this doesn't really blow away the
DBT argument - its more that it shows that the way we do the tests is
not adequate).

I once did a DBT using cheap cables and a cheap amp against
upscale cables and an expensive amp. In other words, I daisy
chained components together to get the greatest potential
audible difference possible. The combinations still sounded
alike. I have done sighted comparisons this way for years,
too, and got the same results.

Now, sighted comparisons are tricky, because those who have
"the will to believe" will have serious problems doing them.
They are looking for something to believe in and they have
this compulsion to purchase items that are supposedly a cut
above what the grubby masses would purchase. This allows
them to feel somehow superior.

I mean, I doubt they are out there doing double blind
tests with hundreds of permutations of high end audio gear all the time
- the cost would be amazing.

One need not do scads of such tests. Just a few would do the
trick, and anyone who has weird ideas about amps and wires
should become reasonably educated about the issue after a
few good DBT sessions. Unfortunately, those with the will to
believe will probably not be swayed. They need those beliefs.

I would also think that it takes some time to get used to the sound of
a system anyway, and I doubt DBTs are long enough to allow for that
(also because of cost). ...but that's another argument and I'm sure
I'm going to catch enough flak for this one already

There is no reason that a DBT cannot be run slow and easy. I
see no sense in this, because you either can hear or cannot
hear, but doubters should be able to take all the time they
want. However, let's be serious. Those true believers are
not going to be swayed by any comparison test, no matter how
fair or rigorous. They will simply write off the test as
flawed, because it does not support their beliefs.

In conclusion, the lunatic fringe - both the con artists and
the suckers - have used your points to good effect for
years. The suckers use them to explain away their
preconceptions and the con artists use them to fleece the
suckers.

There is no figuring the limited mind.

Howard Ferstler
Retired audio writer, and enjoying
every minute.

Brother Horace the Shameless Fraud said:

I once did a DBT

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly. This laziness is as much a testament to your laziness
as it is to your inadequate hearing acuity.

Shall we now recapitulate your other misadventures with "tests", plagiarism,
libel, and publishing fraud?





--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

Brother Horace the Shameless Fraud said:

I once did a DBT

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly. This fraud is as much a testament to your laziness as
it is to your inadequate hearing acuity.

Shall we now recapitulate your other misadventures with "tests", plagiarism,
libel, and publishing fraud?





--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:41:22 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



Brother Horace the Shameless Fraud said:

I once did a DBT

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly. This fraud is as much a testament to your laziness as
it is to your inadequate hearing acuity.

Shall we now recapitulate your other misadventures with "tests", plagiarism,
libel, and publishing fraud?

A touch of Alzheimer's, George?

[Howard Ferstler]

paul packer wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:41:22 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:

Brother Horace the Shameless Fraud said:

I once did a DBT

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly.

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them.
Why torture yourself and struggle against the impossible.

Keep rationalizing, tweako.

Howard Ferstler

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Howard Ferstler wrote:

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them.
Why torture yourself and struggle against the impossible.

While if somebody believes that they *do* hear a difference, why not
just let them enjoy and/or share that experience? Why demand tests or
other 'proof'? Why torture them? (You can do whatever you want to
yourself, of course.)

Keep rationalizing, tweako.

Uh, yah.

[George M. Middius]

Brother Horace the Fanatically Incompetent whined:

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly.

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them.
Why torture yourself and struggle against the impossible.

You might be interested to know that your understanding of science is on a
par with the Krooborg's.

Why bother, indeed. This question, even though you meant it rhetorically, is
in the same category as the pauper's wistful "How much does it cost?" The
answer is, if you don't know why, forget about the entire exercise.

The point being, Clerkie, is that your idea of a "test" is a joke, and
everybody knows it. Would you like us to promote you by acclamation from
Clown to Buffoon? Just say the word, Mr. Bombast.





--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

[Clyde Slick]

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
news:44a7fe73$1@kcnews01...
paul packer wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:41:22 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:

Brother Horace the Shameless Fraud said:

I once did a DBT

No you did not. It wasn't "double" and it wasn't a "test". We know this
because halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly.

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them. Why torture
yourself and struggle against the impossible.


Too bad your test didn't have the option of a 'no difference heard'
response. Its a major flaw.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[paul packer]

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 13:11:49 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them.

I think you mean if YOU cannot hear the differences, WE cannot hear
them. Please check your posts for accuracy, Howard.

[John Atkinson]

Howard Ferstler wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:41:22 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:
halfway in, you gave up trying to distinguish the components and
just guessed randomly.

If you cannot hear the differences, you cannot hear them.

Yet your own published test results showed that you _could_
hear the difference, Mr. Ferstler. Unfortunately, you misinterpreted
the data to align with your belief that you couldn't.

At least The Sensible Sound published your correction in a
subsequent issue, after your error had been discussed at length on
this forum.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
news:44a42299@kcnews01...

Howard Ferstler
Retired audio writer, and enjoying
every minute.


Life is easy. You don't have to look for things
to copy.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

In article 44a42299@kcnews01, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

I once did a DBT using cheap cables and a cheap amp against
upscale cables and an expensive amp. In other words, I daisy
chained components together to get the greatest potential
audible difference possible. The combinations still sounded
alike. I have done sighted comparisons this way for years,
too, and got the same results.

If you want to be useful, who recorded the Barbirolli "English String
Music" of Elgar and V-W works?

Stephen

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:33:57 GMT, MINe 109
wrote:

In article 44a42299@kcnews01, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

I once did a DBT using cheap cables and a cheap amp against
upscale cables and an expensive amp. In other words, I daisy
chained components together to get the greatest potential
audible difference possible. The combinations still sounded
alike. I have done sighted comparisons this way for years,
too, and got the same results.

If you want to be useful,

He doesn't.

Howard Ferstler wrote


I once did a DBT using cheap cables and a cheap amp against upscale cables
and an expensive amp. In other words, I daisy chained components together to
get the greatest potential audible difference possible. The combinations
still sounded alike. I have done sighted comparisons this way for years,
too, and got the same results.



Ferstler, you're up to no good again. After having your butt
solidly smacked and kick around here for so long, so many
times, you come trashing back around like a drunkard high
on coca leaves and sounding like everything is allright. Well,
everything is not allright. You should know that. For shame,
for shame.







Howard Ferstler
Retired audio writer, and enjoying
every minute.

[Howard Ferstler]

JBorg, Jr. wrote:

Ferstler, you're up to no good again. After having your butt
solidly smacked and kick around here for so long, so many
times, you come trashing back around like a drunkard high
on coca leaves and sounding like everything is allright. Well,
everything is not allright. You should know that. For shame,
for shame.

Enjoy your fantasies, tweako.

Howard Ferstler

[Clyde Slick]

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
news:44a7fec0$1@kcnews01...
JBorg, Jr. wrote:

Ferstler, you're up to no good again. After having your butt
solidly smacked and kick around here for so long, so many
times, you come trashing back around like a drunkard high
on coca leaves and sounding like everything is allright. Well,
everything is not allright. You should know that. For shame,
for shame.

Enjoy your fantasies, tweako.

Howard Ferstler


I fantasize about being a bigtime audio plagiarist.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

[paul packer]

On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 16:10:51 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
news:44a7fec0$1@kcnews01...
JBorg, Jr. wrote:

Ferstler, you're up to no good again. After having your butt
solidly smacked and kick around here for so long, so many
times, you come trashing back around like a drunkard high
on coca leaves and sounding like everything is allright. Well,
everything is not allright. You should know that. For shame,
for shame.

Enjoy your fantasies, tweako.

Howard Ferstler


I fantasize about being a bigtime audio plagiarist.

Yes, Howard will be able to advise there. It's a very noble profession
and extremely rewarding. as it gives one lots of time in later years
to visit newsgroups and name-call innocent posters who've done no
worse than indulge their hobby. Who wouldn't want that sort of spare
time?

[Howard Ferstler]

Clyde Slick wrote:

I fantasize about being a bigtime audio plagiarist.

No doubt. However, you will have to be satisfied with being
a mundane con artist.

Howard Ferstler