🚀 go-pugleaf

Clyde Slick wrote:
> 
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:scc9d1h83hel4v8u5goe1plhnohbe2t8ek@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:45:15 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
> > <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>"Howard Ferstler" <ferstle@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> >>news:42D47BFB.8C63757F@attglobal.net...
> >>> Clyde Slick wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>>> news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
> >>>> > On 11 Jul 2005 17:27:35 -0700, calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> >> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
> >>>> >>they should all sound the same according to tests.
> >>>
> >>>> >In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
> >>>> > players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
> >>>
> >>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
> >>>
> >>> You are just trying to rationalize the fact that you simply
> >>> must have something exotic and esoteric to believe in. (That
> >>> this involves audio gear and not some kind of religious
> >>> deity and a need for salvation shows a monumental smallness
> >>> of mind.) That you place expectation effects higher up on
> >>> the scale than simply not hearing differences during a DBT
> >>> says more about you as a true believer than it does about
> >>> any kind of audio gear.
> >>>
> >>Take a good look at the test methodology, it only accounts
> >>for eliminating one side of the expectation effects, the expectation
> >>that there will be differences. It does not address eliminating
> >>expectation
> >>effects, based upon an expectation that they will sound the same. Thus,
> >>this so-called "unbiased" test is actually quite biased towards
> >>producing your "expected" results.
> >
> > Bullshit. Those tests are taken by people from both sides of the
> > fence. The results are the same, only the reactions vary! :-)
> >
> 
> That they are taken by people from both sides is irrelevant.
> Its the test design  that skews the results, so that they tend to
> be the same

How could this be? With the ABX protocol the participant, be
he blessed with my point of view or with yours, can compare
A and B openly, knowing exactly which is which. With the
switch to X he can then decide if X sounds like A or B, both
of which, as I noted can be known by the participant. The
ABX test is both a blind and sighted test at the same time.

This participant can indeed be like me and be generally
predisposed to believe that differences will not be audible.
That may make you feel smug, but how do you explain the
failure of those who think they CAN hear differences prior
to taking the test not being able to hear those differences
blind? They had expectation effects that were just the
opposite of those you claim prejudice the tests in favor of
differences not being audible.

Howard Ferstler