In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
oups.com
Due to the several people displaying questionable reading
ability and/or simply lying about my statements (thereby
showing that they have a weak argument), I'll clairfy my
position on the issue of "hearing".

I don't claim, nor have I ever claimed (as Chung noticed
- I wonder when Vlad will show up with his supposed
evidence about this LOL) that I have better hearing than
anyone else. I don't. My hearing is just above average
for a person of my age, as shown by an audiometer test
from two years ago.

Note that typical hearing tests relate to how small of a sound can be heard,
and are usually limited to 8 KHz on the high end. Live concerts involve
sounds that are at least 60-80 dB louder than the smallest sound that can be
heard.

So?

Sound quality as perceived by audiophiles involves sounds that go as
high as 12-18 KHz.

How is this different than what I am required to hear?

I claim that a person trained as I've been trained and
who has the live music experience that I have, will be a
better judge of the sound of an audio system AS IT
COMPARES TO LIVE MUSIC than does the average person.

This is a straw man argument because Jenn is not discussing this matter with
average persons. She's discussing it with audiophiles, many of which are
frequent attenders at live concerts.

And quantity doesn't matter, right?