On Sun, 15 May 2005 19:34:38 +0200, Lionel
wrote:

severian a écrit :
wrote in message
oups.com...

severian wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
m...

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:


Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply

demonstrated

that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as

fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!



True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an argument.

Were you really waiting for intellectual honesty from dave
weil ?
These 2 words are at the antipode of his way of living.

:-(

Perhaps you should go back and review the record. It is clear, and
even the "objectivists" were forced to admit it, that the Zipser tests
weren't conducted to the normal "gold standard" of dbts. It is also
clear that the trend, when the test was prematurely stopped, was that
Mr. Zipser was approaching getting a statistically signignicant number
of trials correct.

There were way too many flaws in the testing procedure to claim, even
using dbt proponents own standards, any sort of significant result.