wrote in message
ups.com...

Robert Morein wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
As requested by Arny here's a repeat of the piece that made him "laugh
himself silly". Always willing to help- that's me.
The left-right method for comparing components is not a "test".
I lay no claims to scientific validity. This would require well
designed research to show that it works and who it works for. It works
for me and it might work for others.
I do not claim an invention. It seems to me so common-sensical that I'm
certain that many others thought of it and used it before I ever did.
The task is "Which one of these two components I like better". Period.

) Get a monophonic or near monophonic (eg. centred soprano) signal
source. MUSICAL, not an artefact.
2) On the left insert one component, on the right the OTHER ONE,
Adjust volumes to get the image dead centre.
3) Listen from side to side-write down your preference, get BLINDED..

I do see a problem with this.
There is a phenomena known as "comb filtering", which exists whenever an
identical, or nearly identical, signal is played through stereo speakers.
It
is a psychoacoustic fact that most listeners are generally unbothered by
this when the material is stereo, ie., the channels are nonidentical.
However, when monophonic material is played, the psychoacoustic masking
is
not present. Hence, the frequency response contains sharp nulls that
occur
all through the audio band.

The problem with comb filtering is that it is a powerful addition to the
test environment. If one argues that each source is equally handicapped,
this would resemble the attitude of the ABXers, who claim,
legalistically,
that the DUTs are subject to an unbiased environment. However, the
assertion
that equal disadvantage produces an unbiased test, or constitutes an
environment equivalent for ranking to an actual listening environment, is
at
best, unprovable. It constitutes an extreme complication.

I wouldn't presume to argue with you about psychoacoustics, especially
as I know next to nothing about the subject beyond the simple medic's
instinctive suspicion that anything starting with "psych..." (eg.
psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, psychosomatics...etc) argues from a
different set of premises from those I learned to consider
"evidence".

Be it as it may: it works for me. Example: I conclude a DIY project ( a
simple one- all that I can accomplish). I listen proudly to it in the
conventional stereo mode. Then I put it into a left-right comparison:
the side with it sounds worse than the unimproved side. End of
illusion.
But thank you sincerely for thinking about it seriously, Would you now
try it?
Ludovic Mirabel

I'm pretty sure I have, but I prefer the "quick switch".
If there is not an obvious difference, if I feel that I am confused by lack
of level matching, I usually decide that "good is good enough". Of course,
prior to that, I did go through a period of neurotic searching for the
ultimate in pleasure, which is, by the nature of the human animal, an
open-ended and self contradictory enterprise.