New vs Vintage
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 12:25:27 -0700, bob wrote
(in article ):
On Apr 1, 12:02=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
Your opinions are not necessarily facts, and I've seen no DIRECT proof th=
at
these null results from DBTs actually PROVE anything. Sure they satisfy t=
hose
who believe that DBT is the final arbiter of component differences, but t=
hat,
in itself, is a form of circular reasoning. A self-fulfilling prophecy as=
it
were.
If DBTs don't prove anything, why are they accepted by peer-reviewed
psychoacoustics journals?
Are they? Where, then, are these peer reviews? And do psychoacoustic journals
test audio gear?
Could it be that the real scientists have a different standard for
what constitutes proof than you do?
I doubt it, Because certainly Arny has not satisfied my standards for proof
yet. Remember, I'm not anti-DBT, I just have a few niggling doubts about its
efficacy for testing audio equipment.
And whose standard should we
trust, in that case?
Only those who prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt
|