🚀 go-pugleaf

"George M. Middius" <cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net> wrote in message
news:vticd1td56bh5vp4ov3f0i4b2e0qqp764b@4ax.com

> Is somebody trying to peddle some "test" equipment on the
> audio newsgroups?

Yes. We've got a problem here with people who seem to think
that CD players and amplifiers are test equipment that
everybody needs to buy.

> I can't figure out the point of this discussion.

Given your demonstrated lack of interest in audio Middius,
this surprises me very little.

>Who would
> want to go to all the trouble of setting up a
scientifically
> meaningful "test" just to decide which CD player to get?

Good question. People like Pinkerton and I tell people that
CD players tend to sound very much alike. Therefore they
should make their CD player choices based other factors that
are more important to them.

Unfortunately we've got the technologically backward
nay-sayers like Fella, who want people to believe that their
are mind-boggling audible differences between CD players,
amplifiers and everything else. They're the guys who are
peddling tests - in their case sighted, non-level-matched,
non-time-synched listening tests. They're the guys who are
peddling test equipment, in their case people should buy
this amplifier and test it at home, and then buy that
amplifier and test it at home, and so forth.

> I  don't think there's a shred of realism in this
ideology.

Middius, you're not even a real person. How can you
logically present yourself as a judge of realism? Look at
the people around you like Art and Surf. They are so ashamed
of what they post here and their long-term close association
with you that they won't even use their real names here.

> If you want "science", you can't just have a friend switch
the
> components back and forth, and then try to decide which is
> which.

It's not about science, its about doing a reasonble
comparison. That is, if you are actually going to do the
listening tests that people lik Fella and Art keep pushing.

>That's not a real "test", it's just a crude simulation.

Agreed, what that kind of test procedure there's no
level-matching and there's no time-synching so of course
everything will sound different, which is what Art and Fella
keep pushing.

> If you want a real "test", you need testing equipment, a
truly
> quiet environment, and meaningful controls of bias.
Otherwise
> you're just spinning your wheels.

Since when are you an expert about testing, Middius? What
good listening tests have you done and where have you posted
the results? Have you written any papers or magazine
articles about testing? Since when have you been in favor of
testing audio equipment? Why the change of heart?

> So I have to think that after one of these inane go-rounds
> about "tests", somebody is going to pop up with an offer
to
> sell some "test" equipment.

Seems like a worthy business opportunity for you Middius,
given that you have no known job, no known tradem, no known
business, no known education, and no known means of support.

> When it happens, we can all laugh
> about the salesman who tried to sell snow to Eskimos.

Whatever that means.