"Nousaine" wrote in message
. net...
"Wylie Williams" wrote:
"Harry Lavo" wrote
Remember, a while back I introduced a scientific study published by
Oohashi
et al that among other things suggests that a different form of
double-blind-testing may be more music-friendly (showing significant
differences where the more traditional quick-switching blind a-b or
a-b-x
fail to show the difference). This should be a warning flag to the dbt
fraternity that some of the arguments put forth in the past by
subjectivists
might have an element of truth to them. Worthy of investigation, at
least.
Instead, I was attacked for bringing the article to light, the
researchers
were implied to be on the take, the existing orthodoxy was trotted out
as
being "irrefutable", and a whole range of defense mechanisms were
raised.
This hardly suggests a search for truth. Rather it has the earmarks of
a
rather pedantic "there-is-nothing-new-to-be-discovered" attitude here
that
is rather more comfortable with the status quo than some of us believe
is
healthy. So when this attitude is used to beat all conflicting
observation
to death, it becomes onerous to people who are willing to consider the
orthodoxy but don't like being beat into submission with it.
You would think that adherents of objective testing would welcome
variety in approaches to their goal of evaluating audio objectively
rather
than subjectively. But where human personality is a factor there are
goals
and then there are goals. At times it seems that the primary goal of
some
contributors on RAHE is not the promotion or sharing of knowledge of the
advantages of the objective approach. That may have been the original
inspiration, but sometimes the goal seems to be a quest for dominance:
"I'm
smart; you're dumb. Admit it.", with the accompanying lack of civility
that
necessarily accompanies any form of browbeating. As it doesn't take much
of
this to discourage most people the result is to create a high percentage
of
transient participants and lurkers. That's a shame, because the
objective
approach should be better served. It's not as though it has a home
elsewhere
like the one it has found on RAHE.
Let us hope that the discussion will evolve and improve, and become
more inclusive and tolerant of different approaches, such as the one you
offered.
Wylie Williams
Why don't you or Harry include bias controlled listening in your methods?
It's
not that hard. Be more inclusive and tolerant.
"
"It's not that hard?" Reading RAHE posts makes it look like a very
involved process, especially since RAHE members argue at length about the
validity of the methods, the conduct of the tests, and the credibility of
the results.
But if there is a simple method I would like to see instructions. I
am considering comparing three amps I own. Normally I would have just
substited and listened to each a few days, comparing opinions with my wife
as we went along, but I will consider bias controlled listening.
Wylie Williams