[Peter Wieck]

Arny:

This is a moderated forum, so I will use more gentle language than is
my wont in these cases.

First, I am not disputing the study. I am disputing the conclusions
you draw from it. Put another way, I am disputing the inference you
make from the (to me) rather obvious findings of the study.

The study focused on a service with no direct claims of high-fidelity,
not necessarily even of FM-Broadcast Standards. So, leaping to the
conclusion that this study would be indicative of listeners in an
audio high-fidelity context is just a *bit* of a stretch. Keep in mind
that the participants in this study - users of the transcription
services with established expectations, the sight-impaired, would have
pretty much a two-level response: Good enough/Not good enough.

Again, and absolutely anecdotally, my experience with sight-impaired
and blind individuals is that not only are they quite adept at using
their audio systems, but that their level of sensitivity and
expectations of it are acute. Often to the point of having beloved
items repaired at costs well beyond replacement to maintain the sound
that they desire.

So, once again, I am not in the least bit arguing with the study or
its conclusions.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA