"S888Wheel" wrote in message


I am not so convinced it is a snap to do them well. I think if
Stereophile were to do something like this it would be wise for them
to consult someone like JJ who conducted such tests for a living.

JJ was a free agent for a while after Lucent fired him, and before Microsoft
hired him. However, JJ seems to be too much of a closet golden ear to be as
aggressive and pragmatic as scientific objectivity demands. This allows him
to curry favor with the golden ear press which he actively did for a while.
Yet he talks the talk, maintaining a veneer of scientific respectability.
Hey, its what he seems to need to be comfortable.

Would you suggest that such DBTs be limited to comparisons of cables
amps and preamps?

It's not that tough to DBT just about any audio component if you are
pragmatic enough. JJ's incessant public mindless and evidenceless criticism
of PCABX convinced me that he's simply not pragmatic enough to be worth much
trouble.

I think DBT with speakers and source components are
quite a bit more difficult.

Shows how little you know, sockpuppet wheel.

Would you limit such tests to
verification of actual audible differences? Personally, I like blind
comparisons for preferences. They are more difficult than sighted
comparisons for obvious reasons.

Preference comparisons make no sense if there are no audible differences.
There are two major DBT protocols:

ABX for sensitive detection of differences.

ABC/hr for determining degree of impairment or degradation, which roughly
equates to preferences if you presume that audiophiles naturally prefer
undegraded sound or sound that is less degraded or less impaired. Since
there are so-called audiophiles who prefer the sound of tubes and vinyl
which can be rife with audible degradations, its not clear that one can
blithely presume that all audiophile prefer sound that has less impairment.

The fact that they don't even create the tools to do it is telling to
me.

The tools for doing DBTs of just about *everything* are readily available,
presuming that the investigator is sufficiently pragmatic. Since we're
talking religious beliefs, we can't presume pragmatic investigators in every
case.

In the case of Stereophile, the use of DBTs would no doubt embarrass the
management and many of the advertisers. Therefore, Stereophile has maximal
incentive to be as non-pragmatic as possible. They simply behave
predictably.