Steven Sullivan wrote in message ...
ludovic mirabel wrote:

Two questions: How will you select your test subjects for a
"controlled DBT"?

Mr. Sullivan:
Audiophile magazine reviewers who routinely reports audible differences in amps
and cables and CD transports to the public, would be a logical choice.
Let's test *their* claims, since their claims drive a significant
part of the high-end industry.

And what the heck, let's throw in those who strenuously object, here , to skeptical
questions about their claims of difference. You included.

Who "asked me skeptical questions" about which my "claims of
difference"? How about a quote?- I understand paraphrase is not
acceptable in RAHE.
Any objections, Mr. Mirabel?

None whatsoever. I'm happy you asked me that question. All I
have to do is to requote the next sentence in my posting. Exactly
where you cut me off. It was:
"I'd want to know , what age, what training and ABX aptitude
they have shown and last but not least what kind of music they've been
exposed to. ".
Aptitude first: I happen to be hopeless at ABXing.
Panel selection second: Did the reviewers,- whom you say you
despise but apparently continue to read, (why on earth?)- claim to be
good at your "controlled DBT"? If so when and where?
Panel selection third: Would you oblige and quote evidence
that your "controlled DBT" ( a cryptonim for ABX, I presume) doesn't
interfere with perceptions of many subjects ( including myself and
presumably some reviewers)
I documented that 80% of "expert audiophiles" in Greenhill's
cable test failed to identify 1,75 db volume difference when ABXing
and
40% of supertrained professionals in S.Olive's Revelspeakers
"listening room" test, and most of his untrained subjects in his
loudspeaker test (see the recent thread) similarly failed at
relatively simple tasks- recognising frequency bumps and dips and
distinguishing unlike loudspeakers. Do you have documentation to the
contrary?.
So my results on comparing anything whatsoever by ABX would
be
guaranteed to make you happy:"They all sound the same". Checking it
would be a waste of time. But no, no objection. Always anxious to
please.
But we don't know about you Mr. Sullivan. Could it be that
you too get the same answer in all of your ABX research? How would you
know when you're wrong if all you have been getting were "It all
sounds the same"? Could that be the cause of your irritation with
those who rely on other methods?
How about trying to listen with your ears without ABX in
the way? Who knows? You might get to like it.
Ludovic Mirabel