"EddieM" wrote in message
. ..

wrote


Now, from the creature posting as "Eddie M.", a demonstration of
"English as a fifth language":


EddieM scrawled:



None of these foul talk should have had happen, at least on my part, if
that sausage Hero of yours simply don't cowardly run away to face
up to the rather straightforward challenges presented his way. He does
this running away time after time and again and I'm (and others, I'm
sure)
is sick of it. What's even frustrating is the fact that just before he
scamper away, he'd desperately clasp unto his prankish Debating Trade
hocus-pocus and start accusing you of saying things you had not said.
Then he start dissembling ... supported by lies after another. This
goes
on and on as he cheat his way in attempt to make sense of what he does,
nevermind the personal insult in the end.


What other valid audio testing do you know you believe support the
notion that audiophiles are delusional for hearing subtle differences
that (you think) aren't there ?


"Eddie M.", doing The Resistance proud! ;-)


Thing, do you know of other audio testing methodology which you believe
support the notion that audiophiles are delusional, as Mckelvy had said
before, for hearing subtle differences that aren't there ? Fair enough ?


For the record, nobody has said that audiophiles are delusional for
believing they hear differences that aren't really there. What has been
said is that people doing sighted, non-bias controlled comparisons are apt
to expect to believe they hear differecncers that aren't really there. The
use of DBT's and level matching are for the purpose of making sure it's
something actually audible, as opposed to wishful thinking or some other
form of bias.
The idea of using only ones ears to determine audible difference, should be
a slam dunk, nobody should object, since it's supposed to be all about the
sound, right?

That is the reason that other audio related fields use DBT's and why they
are able to build better products, or at least no degrade the sound quality
of their products.

Cornered, Mickey resorts to preaching amorality and anarchy.

I don't remember electing you moral guidance chief of RAO.

snicker

Will you remember this posture the next time you decide it's your responsibility
to castigate another poster?

[Long wait while Mickey comes up with yet another IKYABWAI.]

"sam" wrote in message
...
" wrote...

"EddieM" wrote

The sad truth is that you're Krooger's tag-along personal toilet paper
who follows him behind from thread to thread then tongued-lick his
asshole
dry each time he squat and takes a dump.

Anal obsession noted, again.


It's not an anal obsession, Mike. It's an analogy - and a rather good
one.
I don't know why you can't see that Arny is a jerk and I can't imagine why
you feel the need to defend him.

It's less of a defense of his behavior and more of a condemnation of the
response to him. You don't gain moral superiority by becoming worse than
that which you claim to despise.
Nobdoy has to read his posts. There are such things as killfiles. There is
no reason anybody should be subjected to a word on RAO they don't like or
can't stomach.
If he's so annoying, give him a hearty **** off and be done with it, then we
can talk about audio.

I suppose it's all because Arny says all
amps sound the same and that aligns with your belief.

Neither he nor I have such a belief, nice strawman.

Of course, you've
admitted other possibilities exist.

And so has Arny, in fact he and I both recognize that it's possible for amps
and such to sound different, the differnce between us and the rabble, is
that we know there are reason why this happens and that the reasons are not
mystical or unexplainable.

"George Middius" wrote in message
...


Cornered, Mickey resorts to preaching amorality and anarchy.

I don't remember electing you moral guidance chief of RAO.

snicker

Will you remember this posture the next time you decide it's your
responsibility
to castigate another poster?

Certian behavior is considered anathema anywhere. I feel no problem
chastising those, even Arny who go beyond the pale. In your case it's
probably beyond the pail, which explains those stains on the carpet.

[Long wait while Mickey comes up with yet another IKYABWAI.]

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
NYOB123 wrote




I see you've given up trying to be clever, now it's just crude. Everybody
has to have a niche I suppse.


None of these foul talk should have had happen, at least on my part, if
that sausage Hero of yours simply don't cowardly run away to face
up to the rather straightforward challenges presented his way.

I see, failing to answer questions in a way that you like means it's OK to
say anything you want about them, including calling their family members
whores.


AK is a coward who dupes gullible people, then whore his family
for support and sympathy.


He does
this running away time after time and again and I'm (and others, I'm sure)
is sick of it.

So what? AFAICT he's answered all your questions you just don't understand
the answers, as was the case when you needed so many responses on the
question of level matching.


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively affect
the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.




What's even frustrating is the fact that just before he scamper
away, he'd desperately clasp unto his prankish Debating Trade hocus-pocus
and start accusing you of saying things you had not said. Then he start
dissembling ... supported by lies after another. This goes on and on as he
cheat his way in attempt to make sense of what he does, nevermind the
personal insult in the end.

I don't remember electing you moral guidance chief of RAO.


You don't have to elect me to describe your hero.

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote





For the record, nobody has said that audiophiles are delusional for
believing they hear differences that aren't really there. What has been
said is that people doing sighted, non-bias controlled comparisons are apt
to expect to believe they hear differecncers that aren't really there.


And as had been pointed out to you that people doing sighted eval do hear
differences that are there


The use of DBT's and level matching are for the purpose of making sure it's
something actually audible, as opposed to wishful thinking or some other
form of bias.

The idea of using only ones ears to determine audible difference, should be
a slam dunk, nobody should object, since it's supposed to be all about the
sound, right?


Right, I don't object to your challenges about using only the ears in
determining
sound differences, it's the one between.

"EddieM" wrote in message
m...

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote





For the record, nobody has said that audiophiles are delusional for
believing they hear differences that aren't really there. What has been
said is that people doing sighted, non-bias controlled comparisons are
apt to expect to believe they hear differecncers that aren't really
there.


And as had been pointed out to you that people doing sighted eval do hear
differences that are there

Nobody has ever said diferently, but when it happens it's because the
differences are not subtle, they are much larger than ABX is used for.

The use of DBT's and level matching are for the purpose of making sure
it's something actually audible, as opposed to wishful thinking or some
other form of bias.

The idea of using only ones ears to determine audible difference, should
be a slam dunk, nobody should object, since it's supposed to be all about
the sound, right?


Right, I don't object to your challenges about using only the ears in
determining
sound differences, it's the one between.


Thanlks for proving that when you get a civil reply, you still feel
compelled to throw in an insult.

"EddieM" wrote in message
m...
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
NYOB123 wrote




I see you've given up trying to be clever, now it's just crude.
Everybody has to have a niche I suppse.


None of these foul talk should have had happen, at least on my part, if
that sausage Hero of yours simply don't cowardly run away to face
up to the rather straightforward challenges presented his way.

I see, failing to answer questions in a way that you like means it's OK
to say anything you want about them, including calling their family
members whores.


AK is a coward who dupes gullible people, then whore his family
for support and sympathy.


He does
this running away time after time and again and I'm (and others, I'm
sure)
is sick of it.

So what? AFAICT he's answered all your questions you just don't
understand the answers, as was the case when you needed so many responses
on the question of level matching.


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect
the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.




What's even frustrating is the fact that just before he scamper
away, he'd desperately clasp unto his prankish Debating Trade
hocus-pocus and start accusing you of saying things you had not said.
Then he start dissembling ... supported by lies after another. This
goes on and on as he cheat his way in attempt to make sense of what he
does, nevermind the personal insult in the end.

I don't remember electing you moral guidance chief of RAO.


You don't have to elect me to describe your hero.

"EddieM" wrote in message
m...
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
NYOB123 wrote




I see you've given up trying to be clever, now it's just crude.
Everybody has to have a niche I suppse.


None of these foul talk should have had happen, at least on my part, if
that sausage Hero of yours simply don't cowardly run away to face
up to the rather straightforward challenges presented his way.

I see, failing to answer questions in a way that you like means it's OK
to say anything you want about them, including calling their family
members whores.


AK is a coward who dupes gullible people, then whore his family
for support and sympathy.

I've seen no sign of any such behavior. I've seen you behave like a 12 year
old who's just learned how to swear.

He does
this running away time after time and again and I'm (and others, I'm
sure)
is sick of it.

So what? AFAICT he's answered all your questions you just don't
understand the answers, as was the case when you needed so many responses
on the question of level matching.


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect
the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

Of sourse it would because it would sound different becuase it's a different
spl. If one unit is louder than the outher, by as much as .2db it's audibly
different. It may or may not have a real "quality" difference that would be
masked because of the spl difference.

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are synched
so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally. I never
seen any claim that changing the volume level would affect the comparison,
unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl difference.


What's even frustrating is the fact that just before he scamper
away, he'd desperately clasp unto his prankish Debating Trade
hocus-pocus and start accusing you of saying things you had not said.
Then he start dissembling ... supported by lies after another. This
goes on and on as he cheat his way in attempt to make sense of what he
does, nevermind the personal insult in the end.

I don't remember electing you moral guidance chief of RAO.


You don't have to elect me to describe your hero.


What hero? We agree on ABX and the value of them. That hardly qualifies
him as a hero.

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote




Thanlks for proving that when you get a civil reply, you still feel
compelled to throw in an insult.



Stop putting words in my mouth.

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively affect
the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

Of sourse it would because it would sound different becuase it's a different
spl. If one unit is louder than the outher, by as much as .2db it's audibly
different. It may or may not have a real "quality" difference that would be
masked because of the spl difference.


See what I mean.




3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both units
are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are synched so that
if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally. I never seen any
claim that changing the volume level would affect the comparison, unless it
was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl difference.



Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make use
of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?



snip

"EddieM" wrote in message
m...

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as .2db
it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.


See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it will
sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine differences
not to create them.


3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your
test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are synched
so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally. I never
seen any claim that changing the volume level would affect the
comparison, unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl
difference.



Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make use
of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?

No. Why wouold you ask that? I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you
are familiar with and another that you are considering as an upgrade
replacement for the same function, that you do an ABX or other DBT to
determine if it is different at all, because if it isn't different sounding
it can't be better sounding. To sound better, something has to sound
different in some way.

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as .2db
it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.

See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it will
sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine differences
not to create them.



Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.


You are an embarrassment to your camp.


3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are synched
so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally. I never
seen any claim that changing the volume level would affect the comparison,
unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make use
of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is completely
unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?


I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and another
that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same function,
that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is different at all,
because if it isn't different sounding it can't be better sounding. To sound
better, something has to sound different in some way.


Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip



See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it will
sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine differences
not to create them.

Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.


3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your test
supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are synched
so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally. I never
seen any claim that changing the volume level would affect the comparison,
unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make use
of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is completely
unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?


I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and another
that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same function,
that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is different at all,
because if it isn't different sounding it can't be better sounding. To sound
better, something has to sound different in some way.


Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.

---


Helllllllllooooo... Helllllllllllooooo .... knock...knock...


.....

"EddieM" wrote in message
.. .

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it
sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as
.2db it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.

See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it will
sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine differences
not to create them.



Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.

Any idiot can turn the volume up and say there's a difference. It's a
meaningless difference, since it does not relate to sound QUALITY.


You are an embarrassment to your camp.

You're a waste of oxygen.

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your
test supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are
synched so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units
equally. I never seen any claim that changing the volume level would
affect the comparison, unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear
the spl difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make
use
of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is
completely
unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to
him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?

No, simply ridiculous. The idea for most DBT's is to determine any
difference between a familiar device and a new one that supposedly is
different sounding.

I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and another
that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same function,
that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is different at all,
because if it isn't different sounding it can't be better sounding. To
sound better, something has to sound different in some way.


Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.
It doesn't amtter as long as they are both the same spl.

"EddieM" wrote in message
news
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
---


Helllllllllooooo... Helllllllllllooooo .... knock...knock...


Sometimes you just have to wait.
....

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as .2db
it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.

See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it will
sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine differences
not to create them.

Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.

Any idiot can turn the volume up and say there's a difference. It's a
meaningless difference, since it does not relate to sound QUALITY.

I'm talking about altering the output level in volts on the component
that is familiar to the participants! WHY does it benefit him when
you change that away from the way he'd normally listen to it !


You are an embarrassment to your camp.

You're a waste of oxygen.

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your
test supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are
synched so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units equally.
I never seen any claim that changing the volume level would affect the
comparison, unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear the spl
difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make
use of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is completely
unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?

No, simply ridiculous. The idea for most DBT's is to determine any
difference between a familiar device and a new one that supposedly is
different sounding.

OKEY so it's about a familiar device. Why would you change the
output level of the device familiar to him !



I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and another
that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same function,
that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is different at all,
because if it isn't different sounding it can't be better sounding. To
sound better, something has to sound different in some way.

Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.


It doesn't amtter as long as they are both the same spl.



Doesn't matter ? What if the participant don't want the output level
adjusted on the unit familiar to him BECAUSE HE WANT TO
REMAIN FAMILIAR TO THE WAY THE UNIT SOUND TO
HIM UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES ?

"EddieM" wrote in message
...

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by
mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle
diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it
sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as
.2db it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.

See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it
will sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine
differences not to create them.

Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.

Any idiot can turn the volume up and say there's a difference. It's a
meaningless difference, since it does not relate to sound QUALITY.

I'm talking about altering the output level in volts on the component
that is familiar to the participants! WHY does it benefit him when
you change that away from the way he'd normally listen to it !


You are an embarrassment to your camp.

You're a waste of oxygen.

3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your
test supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons
both units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they
are synched so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units
equally. I never seen any claim that changing the volume level would
affect the comparison, unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear
the spl difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make
use of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is
completely unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you
adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to
him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?

No, simply ridiculous. The idea for most DBT's is to determine any
difference between a familiar device and a new one that supposedly is
different sounding.

OKEY so it's about a familiar device. Why would you change the
output level of the device familiar to him !

Who daid I would? The person doing the comaparison is free to change the
volume at any time to comapre the 2 devices
as long as he/she is comparing to the same spl on the other device to make
it an eqyual comparison.

I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and
another that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same
function, that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is
different at all, because if it isn't different sounding it can't be
better sounding. To sound better, something has to sound different in
some way.

Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.


It doesn't amtter as long as they are both the same spl.



Doesn't matter ? What if the participant don't want the output level
adjusted on the unit familiar to him BECAUSE HE WANT TO
REMAIN FAMILIAR TO THE WAY THE UNIT SOUND TO
HIM UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES ?

Then there would be no reason to change it.

Why don't you go read up on the test protocols so you can answer all your
questions at once?

nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote
nyob123 wrote
EddieM wrote

snip


1. The objection I have with level matching is whether it negatively
affect the way the unit will sound from the way it was design by mfr.

Then you don't understand what level matching means.

But every time you explain what it does wrt distinguishing subtle diff.
during the test, you don't make sense.


2. OR, whether it would negatively affect the listener's ability to
discriminate if the level output was change from the way it
sounded
to him .

Of course it would because it would sound different becuase it's a
different spl. If one unit is louder than the other, by as much as
.2db it's audibly different. It may or may not have a real "quality"
difference that would be masked because of the spl difference.

See what I mean.

No, the above is very clear, if one unit is louder than the other it
will sound different. The reason to do an ABX/DBT is to determine
differences not to create them.

Is there something wrong with your mind ? You are eliminating the
difference i.e. leveling the playing field to benefit your Methodology.

Any idiot can turn the volume up and say there's a difference. It's a
meaningless difference, since it does not relate to sound QUALITY.

I'm talking about altering the output level in volts on the component
that is familiar to the participants! WHY does it benefit him when
you change that away from the way he'd normally listen to it !


You are an embarrassment to your camp.

You're a waste of oxygen.




3. And the claim that adjusting his unit's output level during your
test supposedly benefits him when making comparison.

The above is indecipherable. When doing level matched comparisons both
units are first matched for spl then as I understand it, they are
synched so that if you turn up the volume it affects both units
equally. I never seen any claim that changing the volume level would
affect the comparison, unless it was only on one unit. Then you hear
the spl difference.


Are you suggesting that for this audio testing, the listener must make
use of units that are completely unfamiliar to him ?


No. Why wouold you ask that?


Because under this methodology, it would help if the listener is
completely unfamiliar with the components under test so that if you
adjust the output
level, changes to the quality in their sound will have no affect to
him/her
during the test compared to the way they sounded before the test.
Fair enough ?

No, simply ridiculous. The idea for most DBT's is to determine any
difference between a familiar device and a new one that supposedly is
different sounding.

OKEY so it's about a familiar device. Why would you change the
output level of the device familiar to him !

Who said I would? The person doing the comaparison is free to change the
volume at any time to comapre the 2 devices
as long as he/she is comparing to the same spl on the other device to make
it an equal comparison.



You are a piece of work.




I'm suggesting that if you have a unit you are familiar with and another
that you are considering as an upgrade replacement for the same
function, that you do an ABX or other DBT to determine if it is
different at all, because if it isn't different sounding it can't be
better sounding. To sound better, something has to sound different in
some way.

Under your suggestion above, which one of the unit's output level would
you propose that the proctor adjust :


1. the unit that the listener is familiar with.

2. the unit being considered as an upgarade replacement.

3. OR, both.


It doesn't amtter as long as they are both the same spl.


Doesn't matter ? What if the participant don't want the output level
adjusted on the unit familiar to him BECAUSE HE WANT TO
REMAIN FAMILIAR TO THE WAY THE UNIT SOUNDED TO
HIM UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES ?

Then there would be no reason to change it.


So, you don't have to change the level output.

Good. That's because you're a piece of work.



Why don't you go read up on the test protocols so you can answer all your
questions at once?