|
|
|
|
Seeing/hearing and sighted/blind tests
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 02:08:47 GMT, (Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:T%31c.23360$ko6.217138@attbi_s02...
Gosh, Stewart, how long did it take you to test every human and every piece
of wire ever used by them, and then verifying "competency" tests on those
that might have sounded different, to prove you point.
I don't have to, since all existing evidence and all medical and
engineering knowledge, says that I am right about this. If *you* wish
to claim otherwise, then that is an extraordinary claim, and the
burden of proof is on *you*.
No, no the burden of proof is on you! I have two witnesses to a
phenomenon that YOU say CANNOT exist. Prove us wrong!
You appear not to understand the basic principles behind the burden of
proof. Let me reiterate: all existing evidence and all medical and
engineering knowledge, says that sighted listening is *useless* for
determing subtle sonic differences, such as are claimed among cables
and amplifiers. If *you* wish to claim otherwise, then that is an
extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof is on *you*.
Please note that I am not stating that the differences you claim to
have heard *cannot* exist, simply that you offer no reliable and
repeatable *proof* that they exist. You are not the first to make such
a claim, and not one single one of your predecessors has *ever* been
able to back up his claims under blind conditions.
So far, all you have offered is the stunningly arrogant claim that you
heard what you heard, and you cannot possibly be mistaken. Several of
us, with many years of experience on both sides of the 'subjectivist'
divide, have tried to point out to you that not only *can* you be
wrong, but it is most likely that you *are* wrong, because of the
fatal flaws inherent in sighted listening. This is not a mere
assertion, it's the result of *decades* of research work in many
fields.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
|