Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "JBorg" wrote in message ... ludovic mirabel wrote: Mr. McKelvy says: Until there is a better way to prove subtle difference, ABX is what one uses. The BBC as I showed in another thread used DBT's extensively to update their studio speakers. They did this because they know DBT's work. You quoted BBC before, when challenged to reference one single published ABX test showing that an average listener group using it recognised ANY differences between ANY audio components. I read the BBC report. It concerns a group of BBC exxperts listening double blinded to speakers to decide which one most of them liked best. A perfectly legitimate procedure for anyone to use when deciding his/her's likes and dislikes. No quarrel with that. Note that: There was wide variability of preferences between the individuals in that *expert* group. The purchasing decisions were made by totting up the majority of votes.. Just as it would happen in real life- only more so if one asks every Tom , Dick and Harry for their opinions. Blinded or not blinded. I have no idea what this has to do with the ABX method of asking if X is like A or like B to *prove* differences. I wonder when people will give up the simplistic idea that it is possible to PROVE anything in the world of " I like - I like not". No other walk of life is so plagued. Ludovic Mirabel I apologize to you for making an insensitive response to McKelvy on this thread, a regular contributor posting from southern CA. Apologize for your own deeds not mine. M. McKelvy's ignorance is well known to everone. His ignorance about the potentiality for growth and development in High-End audio industry is particularly disturbing. IOW right on target. His crudeness with regard to understanding our innate and especial abiltiy to perceive and recognize distinctive sound character among top-of-the-world audio gears reflect his narrow- mindedness. Actually, it reflects reality. I'm not intolerant to audio improvements, I'm intolerant to claims made that have no proof. An ability which help to lead us together. A gift that bring us together to share that unrelenting compassion we have for music, and that small opportunity to express our appreciation for the technology that bring us closer even more. I think it would ber hard to find a person who loves high quality audio repordcution more than I do. M. McKelvy is intolerant. He is a doctrinaire with bigoted cause, a crusader with unforbearing pang encumbering himself to bring forth destruction to those sagaciously affirming a sound belief to personal preferences. Along with A. Krueger, H. Fertler, and T. Nousaine, these are symptomatic of their frigid rage to fulminate further technological advancement in the High-End industry. A congregation of hatred that assault those at the forefront laboring unrelentlessly to advance our knowledge in the physics of sound. They are an assembly of polluted thoughts readily ravishing those committed to fulfill our desire to experience in our home the highest state in the art of musical reproduction . Thanks for admitting that we have it right and you guys can not prove that you hear what you claim and that much of what you believe about audio is more in the realm of mysticism. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Anyone know of a good handheld PDA style audio analyser/spl...etc meter? | Pro Audio | |||
Setup of "Bose style" double cube satellite speakers and sub in 5.1 config | Tech | |||
Raw Multi-Track -- What Style Of Music? | Pro Audio | |||
WTB- Old Style Sound Organisation stands | Marketplace | |||
"round" 80 wire IDE cables instead of ribbon style | Pro Audio |