Thread
:
ABX is not DBT's Siamese twin
View Single Post
#
36
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.misc
Posts: n/a
ABX is not DBT's Siamese twin
"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
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.
John Corbett offers a convincing argument in another thread (see
message ) that in cases
where the difference being tested for is small, ie, even trained
listeners, will not reliably detect it 100% of the time, statistical
theory indicates that at least 80 trials are required. As the ABX
tests you keep referring to use very much less than this
number of trials but do involve subtle differences, I think the onus
is on _you_, Mr. McKelvy to show that the evidence is as
strong as your faith would have you believe.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
And I think the fact that ABX and other forms of DBT are accepted by
virtually everybody doing audio research, the onus is on you to show why
they should not be using such methods.
Reply With Quote