wrote
EddieM wrote:



The Objectivist assert that straight listening or more specifically,
sighted evaluation is not a scientifically valid process for determining
if the audio components (except speakers ?) would sound different.


This is one of the few valid assertions that objectivists make. And
should any audiophile decide to delve into scientific research on
audibility of different components they had better do their testing db
if they wish it to be taken seriously by science.


Very well and you agreed with the Objectivist that sighted evaluation
isn't a valid listening technique because it's not science.

Objectivist believe that preferences and biases are such a hindrance
on that basis that they say it invalidate sighted evaluation. The problem
I suppose with strict DB you propose is that it does not seclude nor
sequester the listener's from his own prejudices. That is, when
comparing in strickly double blind, wouldn't deeply held preferences
themselves skew and masked your ability to determine which of the
unknown components is preferable to you *as you compare* how the
two components of equal class sound different from one another.



I for one am not looking to do scientific research. Are you?


I guess because DB is a scientific research on audibility of different
components that it will tell me if I'm imagining things.


Further, Arny stated on # 53:33 that sighted listening is not a reliable
way to pass or fail a listener in terms of his hearing acuity.


That is also true. Hearing acuity tests are done blind.


And when done blind, it will show if I'm hearing things, well I
don't know.



What is really wrong with sighted evaluation ?


Nothing. But it doesn't cut it in scientific research.



Well if there's nothing wrong with sighted evaluation, they still
have to do DB to find out for sure if they're hearing things.


Scott Wheeler