[Arny Krueger]

"John Atkinson" wrote in
message

On May 10, 3:31 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On May 10, 12:09 pm, ScottW wrote:
On May 9, 5:03 pm, Clyde Slick
wrote:
On 9 Mai, 16:37, ScottW wrote:
Not at all. If some biased reviewer expects me to
believe his BS pontifications and pay him for it,
he's gotta provide some proof.

No he does not.

Try to read what I wrote. and if he wants me to pay
him for it, he does.

Then buy "S'phile" and force him to do DBTs. Otherwise,
you aren't paying him.

The irony is that Stereophile has occasionally done SBTs
and DBTs and personally I have taken part in more than
100 since my first in the spring of 1977.

Typically, there's always been some kind of shall I be gentle and say
"distraction" in SP's published BTs.

My rejection of them as a general reviewing tool is based on that
considerable experience.

I know of no SP blind test that has passed a formal or informal peer review.
There is this recurrent flaw - introduction of spurious elements that seem
to be designed to further the SP "Everthing sounds different" agenda.

Remind me again how many blind
tests ScottW has taken part in?

You don't need to be a racer to understand how races can be *fixed*.