Harry Lavo wrote:

This is a misrepresentation of those members' position. What some of us
are saying is that you have to be cognizant of the effects of
expectation bias, and take proper steps to control it , if you really
want to find out if there are *audible only* differences. We always have
said that if the differences are big enough, like those between
speakers, then you don't really need DBT's to differentiate them. We
don't say that "sight always overrides true differences" (in fact we
argue if the audible difference exists in the first place), we are
saying that expectation bias is very likely to override subtle
differences, and that DBT is the best way to control for expectation
bias. In the case of competent amps and speakers, we know that those
differences should be subtle at best, from measurements like frequency
response, distortion and signal-to-noise ratio tests.


What you are saying above is a very reasonable position. Unfortunately, it
seems to believed only in the abstract here. When somebody such as Michael
comes on saying he can hear differences in amps...there is no questioning
him on his listening conditions

Actually I asked him whether he level-matched...

, no consideration of the age or circuitry of
the amps in question (despite one being a digital amp...the one chosen at
that). .no discussion of his stated purpose or state of mind. All that
happens is that he is told because he listened sighted, he is surely
imagining things.

He did describe his listening conditions. Maybe you have missed that?

Then the turmoil ensues.

The turmoil ensues because he refused to believe that expectation bias
could lead to false positives when trying to detect differences. Now
please answer this: do you agree with Michael on this key point? Do you
believe that expectation bias should be controlled for?


They should
know better, but they don't seem to be able to allow even the
possibility
that there are real differences and that you might have heard them.

No, they do, that's why they recommend the Harry Lavo's and Michael
Scarpitti's of this newsgroup to do controlled tests to see if those
differences are real. Heck, they even throw in real money to motivate
them, in the case of cables.


Insisting on a test that the "testees" don' t believe is valid. Nice
'gotcha.

Now Harry, how does the word "recommend" become "insist"?

As far as I am concerned, you don't have to do any controlled testing.
You can pick amps/cables based on whatever criteria. However, when you
want to convince others that there is real, audible, difference between
them, you should use controlled testing like DBT to make sure that
expectation bias (and other stuff like mismatched levels) does not
invalidate your listening tests. DBT is the standard methodology on
difference detection for such a long time, that I don't see any reason
why Michael would have problem with it.


So
don't get upset...it's a world view of theirs that you are not going to
change.

All you need to change their world view is to pass the cable DBT test!
. Simple, isn't it?


Sure, would greatly simplify the objectivist world-view here if we would
just go away and stop challenging the test.

The funny thing is no one asked you to go away and stop challenging the
test. (In fact we even put up money hoping you would take the test.) And
you were the one who said that Michael should go away and find some
other topics to discuss...

BTW, how would you know that Michael would fail a DBT on amps?



But you can ignore them and instead focus on other topics of interest
here
on the forum.


I think the subjectivists actually find this topic of great interest,
based on how frequently they post in these threads...


You think the objectivists ever let an assertion of heard differences pass
without comment or challenge?


You realize how many of these threads were started by subjectivists?