vlad says:

John Atkinson wrote:
At HE2005 -- see http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate --
Arny Krueger made the point that sighted listening changes the
listener's state of mind. This, of course, is correct, but so does
blind
listening, though in a different manner. I offer some further thoughts
on
this at http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/406awsi .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


I read both articles carefully. I must say that John Atkinson simply
cannot reason logically. It is either the guy cannot think logically,
or he is intentionally clouding the issue.

Let's look into the first article. He claims that given two amps -
SS and tube he failed to distinguish them on the base of sound alone
(in DBT). So far so good.

Then in a second phase he acquired SS amp and started listening to it
in sighted conditions.

This is where John clearly is in ERR. Very much so indeed. He should
not have changed the original conditions he was under the influence of
to make his initial decision, ever. What this means is that if he
should have gone on listening to the amp under blinded conditions. He
should have hidden the SS amp from sight and somehow *forgotten* that
he chose it as compared to some tube amp, etc. Then all would have been
fine and dandy.

Yes.

Having done all this then vlad here would'nt call him a fraud no
longer.

Yes.


But John did not stop there but immediately he makes a conclusion that
DBT was defective because later in sighted condition he (John) did not
like the sound of SS amplifier. The purpose of DBT was to establish if
the sound alone can be a discriminating factor between two amps. Turned
out that for John it was not the case. End of story.

And thus spake vlad. Now everyone can go home.