[Scott[_6_]]

On Dec 18, 11:48*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message

...

Well thank goodness in real science researchers know better than to
move the goal posts due to trash talking between audiophiles. I would
think that if objectivists were genuinely interested in applying
science to the question of amplifier sound they would not move the
goal posts nor would they use ABX DBTs the way they have when it comes
to amplifier sound.

The last above seems to show considerable bias.

In your biased opinion :-)

It seems to say that no
"true scientist" has ever done an ABX test of an amplfiier.

That is an odd interpretation. It certainly is not what i was saying
at all. There are many scientists in this world any number of whom are
audiophiles. I would hardly make any claim that none of them have ever
done an ABX test of an amplifier. i have no idea what every scientist
is doing in their spare time for fun. OTOH I have yet to see a peer
reviewed paper published in any scientific journal of ABX tests done
on amplifiers. I would hope though, that any such scientific journal
would call out any such paper should it be shown that the participants
knew in advance what amplifiers A and B were and nothing was done to
control for a possible same sound bias and nothing was done to
demonstrate the test was actually sensitive to real and subtle audible
differences should the result be a null. So if there are such studies
that you know of please cite them. I would be very interested in
reading them.



*That being typically breaking out ABX and failing
to ever control for same sound bias

I've done some checking and the phrase "sound bias" appears to a a
contrivance of its author. It has no standard defined meaning that I know of
or can find in the literature of audio.

My goodness. if you cut the phrase in the middle what do you expect?
OTOH you could talk to your friend JJ Johnston on the need or lack
there of for positive and negative controls in DBTs. More specifically
you might ask him if he thinks "same sound bias" is not an issue in an
ABX test if the subject knows in advance what A and B are. Go ahead,
ask him. ;-) I don't think you are going to like the answer....



*or even calibrate the sensitivity of the test.

I've explained the many ways the the results of blind listening tests to
date have been confirmed, calibrated double and triple checked on RAHE many
times. Amnesia?

Please cite how the Stereophile Tests we have been debating calibrated
the test for sensitivity to audible differences.



But of course my point was the fact that no scientist worth his or her
salt would ever make dogmatic claims of fact based on the results of
any single ABX DBT null.

At this point 100s if not 1,000s of ABX tests have been performed so the
claim that any claims dogmatic or otherwise would be based on the results of
far more than just one test. Straw man argument.

Not interested in cherry picked anecdotal evidence from flawed tests.