"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message

wrote in message
.net...

Who says that? It's not about ABX in particular, it
seems to be that many people just don't think there's
any reason to level match, and to hide the faceplates. It's important if
one wishes to do anything close to an
objective comparison, that level matching and being
blind to the faceplates be done.

The best way to evaluate sound is to use only one's
ears. Nothing else is required, yet some people balk at
this notion.

I've seen very few here on usenet, and certainly not
Jenn, argue that blind testing does not have its
legitimate purposes. I've seen quite a few (including
myself) argue that ABX or other quick-snippet testing as
a means of doing open-ended evaluation of audio
components is the wrong test for that purpose.

Yup, if the tests don't support people's belief's, any excuse in a storm
of logic.

I've also known many (including myself) argue that the
uncertainties created by sighted listening in the real
world often times are less important than the
practicalities when trying to evaluate equipment for
purchase.

Whatever that means.

It means hearing the equipment when and where one can, rather than passing
up the opportunity just because a blind comparison cannot be arranged. If
one could bring a magic invisibility curtain to an infinitely compliant
sales person, blind testing might not be such an onus. As I've said before,
if I had your box, I would consider it a valuable resource, unless problems
in transparency were noted. Blind testing is a good idea. The basis of our
disagreement is your assertion -- if you still make it -- that sighted
testing is worthless regardless of whether the listener has developed some
immunity to psychological bias.