Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:02:43 +0200, Forwarder wrote:
John Phillips wrote: On 2006-01-16, Forwarder wrote: Don Pearce wrote: Fine as an experiment Dismissed! Ne-ext! ![]() - but nothing whatever to do with the situation I have sought to address, What is the situation you are seeking to adress? An audiophool is claiming to hear this or that sound from a cable.. - "it" is deluded - the proof of which is this test .. ?? The tests are both OK for their own purposes. However Forwarder's test determines a sighted majority preference; You've somewhat simplified the "issue" with your evaluation of my test. My test actually measures also *consistency* and consensus. If for instance, 900 people out of 1000 agree that the bass produced by this amp sounds more powerfull then the bass by the other (there is not necessarily "preference" here, some would like strong bass, others may not), and if these amps (which they will, since all amps sound identical in an ABX) sound identical in an ABX then there must be a conclusion to be drawn about the validity of ABX here. Why would you draw such a conclusion? There is no evidence in this test to support it. Do you believe that spiders become deaf when their legs are pulled off? while Don's determines an individual ability to detect a difference. Yes, thank you, Don's test puts the *testee*, the *subject* the *victim* to the test, in the end. It is also a test for the subject to (not) see (but hear) past the stressfull situation. How do you have a test where the testee is *not* put to the test? I would be interested to see one. Some take it as a given that the shine on an exotic cable is enough to distort the perceptions of people but do not accept that a "which is which, tell me bitch!" situation is not... Really! Is this how you believe I might conduct such a test? Remember I would not even be in the room - you listen relaxing in your comfy chair, then write down your answer when you are good and ready. Nothing could be further from "tell me, bitch!". These are completely different matters and not at all equivalent, so you can't substitute one test for the other and expect the same answer. My test tests the tests.. That is, it tries to answer the question whether or not ABX/DBT is applicable to the phenomenon of "audiophoolery" ... No, your test fails to test the test, because your conclusion depends on a begged question - namely that if the result shows no difference, the test must be at fault. That would be thrown out in the first minute of any peer review. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
#2
![]()
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:02:43 +0200, Forwarder wrote: John Phillips wrote: On 2006-01-16, Forwarder wrote: Don Pearce wrote: Fine as an experiment Dismissed! Ne-ext! ![]() - but nothing whatever to do with the situation I have sought to address, What is the situation you are seeking to adress? An audiophool is claiming to hear this or that sound from a cable.. - "it" is deluded - the proof of which is this test .. ?? The tests are both OK for their own purposes. However Forwarder's test determines a sighted majority preference; You've somewhat simplified the "issue" with your evaluation of my test. My test actually measures also *consistency* and consensus. If for instance, 900 people out of 1000 agree that the bass produced by this amp sounds more powerfull then the bass by the other (there is not necessarily "preference" here, some would like strong bass, others may not), and if these amps (which they will, since all amps sound identical in an ABX) sound identical in an ABX then there must be a conclusion to be drawn about the validity of ABX here. Why would you draw such a conclusion? Gee, one *does* wonder.. There is no evidence in this test to support it. "evidence" ? Maybe not. ![]() Do you believe that spiders become deaf when their legs are pulled off? Absolutely. They also become constipated. How do you have a test where the testee is *not* put to the test? I would be interested to see one. Me too. I dont purrport to have all the answers, you do, with some oscilloscope in one had, and a crackling whip on the other. Some take it as a given that the shine on an exotic cable is enough to distort the perceptions of people but do not accept that a "which is which, tell me bitch!" situation is not... Really! Is this how you believe I might conduct such a test? Remember I would not even be in the room It was a "figure of speech" as it were. - you listen relaxing in your comfy chair, and busting my balls as to "is this my cable? Or... is it ... **** ... " ![]() then write down your answer when you are good and ready. Nothing could be further from "tell me, bitch!". Yes yes, in theory, of course. I will take at least 15 minutes per listen, though I *should* be ale to take at least TWO WEEKS per listen... No, your test fails to test the test, because your conclusion depends on a begged question - namely that if the result shows no difference, the test must be at fault. What else would be at fault then? After an ABX shows nill difference between a pair of halcro dm58 monoblocks and a 250 yamaha receiver (which it will do just that: WHAM: SAME DIFFERENCE!), would you be able to substitute them with each other in the real world??? Come on! |
#3
![]()
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:33:46 +0200, Forwarder wrote:
Don Pearce wrote: On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:02:43 +0200, Forwarder wrote: John Phillips wrote: On 2006-01-16, Forwarder wrote: Don Pearce wrote: Fine as an experiment Dismissed! Ne-ext! ![]() - but nothing whatever to do with the situation I have sought to address, What is the situation you are seeking to adress? An audiophool is claiming to hear this or that sound from a cable.. - "it" is deluded - the proof of which is this test .. ?? The tests are both OK for their own purposes. However Forwarder's test determines a sighted majority preference; You've somewhat simplified the "issue" with your evaluation of my test. My test actually measures also *consistency* and consensus. If for instance, 900 people out of 1000 agree that the bass produced by this amp sounds more powerfull then the bass by the other (there is not necessarily "preference" here, some would like strong bass, others may not), and if these amps (which they will, since all amps sound identical in an ABX) sound identical in an ABX then there must be a conclusion to be drawn about the validity of ABX here. Why would you draw such a conclusion? Gee, one *does* wonder.. There is no evidence in this test to support it. "evidence" ? Maybe not. ![]() Do you believe that spiders become deaf when their legs are pulled off? Absolutely. They also become constipated. How do you have a test where the testee is *not* put to the test? I would be interested to see one. Me too. I dont purrport to have all the answers, you do, with some oscilloscope in one had, and a crackling whip on the other. That would be your fantasy, perhaps ;-) Some take it as a given that the shine on an exotic cable is enough to distort the perceptions of people but do not accept that a "which is which, tell me bitch!" situation is not... Really! Is this how you believe I might conduct such a test? Remember I would not even be in the room It was a "figure of speech" as it were. - you listen relaxing in your comfy chair, and busting my balls as to "is this my cable? Or... is it ... **** ... " ![]() then write down your answer when you are good and ready. Nothing could be further from "tell me, bitch!". Yes yes, in theory, of course. I will take at least 15 minutes per listen, though I *should* be ale to take at least TWO WEEKS per listen... No, your test fails to test the test, because your conclusion depends on a begged question - namely that if the result shows no difference, the test must be at fault. What else would be at fault then? After an ABX shows nill difference between a pair of halcro dm58 monoblocks and a 250 yamaha receiver (which it will do just that: WHAM: SAME DIFFERENCE!), would you be able to substitute them with each other in the real world??? Come on! Why would you expect them to show a difference? Amplifier design has reached a peak (we clearly are not talking SET, or any of that kind of crap), at which it is impossible to tell one amplifier from another. Of course if you turn the level up so that one of them starts clipping, all bets are off. Nil difference is precisely what I would expect between those two. Of course they wouldn't substitute in the real world - different features, appearance, all sorts of stuff really. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
It's amazing what you can find when you look. | Audio Opinions | |||
Artists cut out the record biz | Pro Audio |