Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.misc
|
|
ABX is not DBT's Siamese twin
wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Yes, ABX is "one of several Kinds" of DBT or a "subset" of DBT.
Proposed and so intended by A, Krueger. Whatever you say. Offhand I too
can propose 25 more "subsets" with nice initials. The question you
don't even attempt to address is "Has it been researched to
validate it as a test for uncovering differences between audio
components? Where? When?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
You quote me:
Yes, ABX is "one of several Kinds" of DBT or a "subset" of DBT.
Proposed and so intended by A, Krueger. Whatever you say. Offhand I too
can propose 25 more "subsets" with nice initials. The question you
don't even attempt to address is "Has it been researched to
validate it as a test for uncovering differences between audio
components? Where? When?"
And answer as above
No, it hasn't, nor was it ever intended to. All DBT can ever do is
uncover
audible differences in 2 signals. The equipment generating the 2
signals
can be wildly different, but if there's no audible difference, DBT will
not
uncover it. When the statement is made that all decent amplifiers sound
the
same, what is meant is that the differences between audible outputs is
small
enough that it cannot be reliably distinguished by ear. What it does NOT
mean is that the signals are identical, or that you will be equally happy
with either component.
How about long term satisfaction? Just because you fail to uncover
differences in a DBT does not rule out differences that will show up only
after prolonged listening. If this is really true, it can be easily
proven
by running the DBT after the time when the difference appears to show up.
If nobody can pass a DBT under any circumstances, no matter how familiar
they are with the sound of the components in question, then I'm afraid
I'll
have to say that they sound the same. You may be happier with one than
the
other, but it isn't because of sound.
Norm Strong
----------------------------
You quote me and answer (see hidden text)
Yes, ABX is "one of several Kinds" of DBT or a "subset" of DBT.
Proposed and so intended by A, Krueger. Whatever you say. Offhand I too
can propose 25 more "subsets" with nice initials. The question you
don't even attempt to address is "Has it been researched to
validate it as a test for uncovering differences between audio
components? Where? When?"
Dear Norman,
I believe that before two can argue sensibly they have to agree on
definitions- otherwise they are talking past each other.
I am not arguing about DBTs. I shall not repeat what I said in the
original message but if you look at it once again you'll see that I
believe DBTs were and are indispensable in research. I dare say that I
was DOING DBTs before you ever heard the name.
The argument is about the hypothesis that the ABX protocol is the
appropriate tool for differentiating audio components reproducing
music.
And you have offered nothing that shows it is not.
I am still waiting for experimental evidence that it is so but
so far I found nothing. And I researched it using the Public Library
and two excellent bibliographies that were published
two years ago in RAHE.
In addition I issued repeatedly asked for references (JOURNAL, volume,
year, authors, title, page) in the RAHE and RAO and got answers like
that:
1) "There are many. Why don't you look them up". But no address
and no quote.
2) "There are too many to list. Research it".
3) Misleading time-wasting references to sites that do not even mention
ABX (like BBC or B&O.
Enough of this fruitless topic
I do not understand what exactly is your point about doing DBTs
Yes, it is all about audible signals. I buy audio to listen to the
audible musical signals. If I ever listen blind is to find out which
one of the two or three components approaches most closely my
experience of live music as played by so -called acoustic instruments
and as sung by unamplified human voice.
In other words I listen to find out which one I like better.
Don't you? Are you in research? If so RAO or RAHE is not the right
forum for it and the way you describe your research would not qualify
anywhere outside your home.
Your results are YOUR results. They are of no significance whatsoever
to anyone else unless you prove to them that your taste your musical
preferences, your experience and your recommendations parallel theirs.
You're then a respected audio critic for those who are after the same
kind of musical reproduction as you.
Sean Olive in his web presentation showed that differences between
individual DBT performances are enormous. One of his panelists did so
poorly that was quietly dropped and did not appear in the next test
series.
Which is part of the reason for proper training of listeners.
Now a quote from Sean Olive. Note what he says about listening for
preference:
", I rarely ask listeners the question "Is A different than B"?"
In
most cases, the differences between the loudspeakers under test are
measurable (both objective and subjective)and therefore the more
interesting
question for me is "Which speaker do they prefer, by how much, and
why?"
Exactly.
Ludovic Mirabel
Which is why ABX is not used for speaker comparisons other than for things
like xover changes within a given speaker system.
|