[Walt]

John Atkinson wrote:
On Jan 17, 12:56 pm, Walt wrote:

of course this doesn't even address the single-blind nature of the
test. Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clever_Hans

The test was immune to the Clever Hans Effect as the moderator
sat behind and to the side and was not in the listener's view. The
listener didn't know what he was listening to or comparing. All he
had was a remote with 2 buttons, labeled A and B. All he could
see were the loudspeakers and the amplifier volume display.
Levels were matched. The listener listened on his own and could
switch between A and B for as long as he wished. He didn't know
what was being compared until after he had handed in his results.
Of its type, it was quite a well-designed test.


So why were there two CD players if you were comparing speaker cables?
Were you swicthing out more than just the speaker cables?

I'm confused...

From TFA:
"Using two identical CD players, I tested a $2,000, eight-foot
pair of Sigma Retro Gold cables from Monster Cable, which are
as thick as your thumb, against 14-gauge, hardware-store speaker
cable."


//Walt

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Jan 17, 4:04 pm, Walt wrote:
John Atkinson wrote:
The listener didn't know what he was listening to or comparing. All
he had was a remote with 2 buttons, labeled A and B. All he could
see were the loudspeakers and the amplifier volume display.
Levels were matched. The listener listened on his own and could
switch between A and B for as long as he wished. He didn't know
what was being compared until after he had handed in his results.
Of its type, it was quite a well-designed test.

So why were there two CD players if you were comparing speaker
cables?

I have no idea. I didn't design the test, not did I look at the
playback system. I was a listening subject. If you read the
article in the WSJ, you will see that Lee Gomes did other
comparisons, not just cables. But the only test I took
part in involved cables..

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile