Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On 12 Sep 2005 03:58:06 GMT, "Harry Lavo" wrote:


But beyond the financial aspect, I still feel strongly that the "rules" need
to be committed in writing and agreed to by all parties on your side and any
subjectivist who wants to undertake the test on the other side. To not do
so is inviting problems, and since your are making the "offer", what is
stopping you from being the first to propose what you feel are reasonable
conditions (subject to negotiated acceptance, of course).


The rules are already clear, and very sparse - double-blind protocol,
15 correct out of 20 trials to win, level-matching at 1 kHz and 10 kHz
to +/- 0.1dB at the speaker terminals.

That's it. Otherwise, your own choice of venue, equipment, music,
everything. What's *your* problem? The rules couldn't be simpler, and
they couldn't be more accommodating to those nmaking the claims of
difference. You can use your own system in your own listening room
with your own choice of music, and take as long as you like over the
trials. The only stipulations are that the levels must be reasonably
matched, and you mustn't *know* what's connected.

Just exactly what is so difficult for you? After all, these are 'night
and day' differences you hear, no? :-)

Now, let's see - who else agrees to these stipulations?
Who else is putting up $$?
Where is the alleged $5,000??
We only have $1500, allegedly pledged, and $0.00 in actual evidence.

Furthermo

How do you propose under your "rules" to maintain and/or test this +/-
0.1dB at the speaker terminals, IF there is a difference between "zip
cord" and another cable due to the KNOWN characteristics of "zip cord"??

You are proposing the comparison to "zip cord", correct??

Also, please define DBT conditions, IF a human or humans are required to
make the "switch" and not an electronic device? Or is this not permitted?

Just curious about the "rules."

Making NO STATEMENTS, ASSUMPTIONS nor drawing any CONCLUSIONS.

I am asking these things as an interested party, not as an agreed
"challenger." This needs to be made clear at this point.