Harry Lavo wrote:

It is not only how long they have,

So do you at least understand that I am not proposing a short-term,
quick-switching test?

but how they have to do the
identification and make the choice...even after three days, they have to
use
their left brain in an a-b to make a choice. As opposed to evaluating the
equipment and leaving the evaluation itself lead them to their choice

This is pure nonsense. They still have to make a choice--in your case, lots
of them. They have to decide which amp is brighter. Or they have to decide
whether Amp A is a “6” or a “7” on the brightness scale. Which hemisphere do
you think they do that in?

Besides, what’s so ‘un-subjective’ about stating a preference? Audiophiles
do it every day. If that gets in the way of hearing subtle differences, how
do audiophiles ever make a decision about anything?

I’m the one who’s proposed a test that mirrors what audiophiles do every
day. You’ve proposed a test that requires subjects to make a complex set of
judgments according to preset criteria in order to…in order to what, Harry?
If audiophiles can determine their preferences when listening sighted, why
can’t they determine their preferences when listening blind, given the same
freedom?

snip

No, you keep assuming the validity of your test when in fact what is needed
is validation of it before you promulgate it to the world as "the answer".

No, Harry, I keep assuming that experts in psychoacoustics know what they
are talking about when they say that sighted comparisons are worthless for
judging subtle audible differences. I keep assuming that experts in
psychoacoustics know what they are talking about when they say that
long-term comparisons are LESS sensitive because our memory for subtle
audible differences is so poor. I keep assuming that experts in
psychoacoustics know what they are talking about when they say that our
hearing thresholds are pretty much the same, whatever we are listening to.

And I keep assuming that you are not an expert in psychoacoustics.

I don’t have to validate anything except the occasional parking ticket. And
I certainly don’t have to prove DBTs against pseudoscientific claims that
audiophiles only use their right hemispheres when “evaluating” audio
components.


As for the "many other subjectivists here," I think you are being
presumptuous. Finding flaws with bias-controlled tests seems to be
part
of
what makes one a subjectivist. I see no reason to believe that your
test,
even if you could pull it off, would be any different.

bob


That's not how I read it/them at all. They may have some differences
with
me / my way of thinking, but the main problem they have is the
*assumption*
(unverified) that a test that is good for picking out small level
differences in codec artecfact and other known acoustic anomalies is a
suitable technique for open ended evaluation of audio components.

The unverified assumption here is yours: that the human ear works
differently when comparing sound from high-end components than when
comparing sounds from other sources.


No, that the ear-brain combination works differently when asked to evaluate
a components sound on an open-ended basis versus having to choose between
two components in a short timeframe.

See? You’re back to “short timeframes” again. You can’t even hold off
misrepresenting me for a single post.

And my test is exactly designed to
separate the effects of "blindness" from the effects of two different test
techniques. Yours is not.

Pay attention:
1. Preference test, sighted.
2. Preference test, blind.
3 Compare results.

That’s how you isolate the effects of blindness, Harry.

bob

__________________________________________________ _______________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE
download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/...ave/direct/01/