|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: It's all been said here before and refuted. posted by thetubeguy1954 on May 22, 2006 at 08:08:22:
To make some brief comments:1. One wonders what it is you want proof of. Do you want us to prove that two short pieces of wire aren't the same? You are asking the impossible, as we have said many times. You are asking us to prove the null hypothesis.
That you make assertions of difference with no proof doesn't seem to bother you. Prove that the two short wires make an audible difference. With some measuring equipment today, the differences can be measured--just as jj, Jon Risch, or jneutron. Or is that just taking "authority" as the guide? But audible differences? Then prove the differences are audible.
Well, what have you to say to that: apparently you come up with the argument that a chain is only as strong as the weakest link. Then you make the assumption that a little piece of wire is the weakest link. No proof or evidence. If you assert a difference, then it's up to you to provide evidence. But, no you ask us to prove the null hypothesis, as if that somehow justifies you. You're like the fundamentalist who says he is right because we (some individuals) can't prove him wrong!
You say you don't want expert opinion? OK. Prove to me the earth goes around the sun, but sorry, you can't cite any experts. Not allowed. You have to do it all yourself.
2. A DBT is not a measurement. Tell me what it measures? So, you're question was incoherent and you haven't done anything to make it more coherent.
3. Again, if you want to ignore the experts, those who have done DBTs as part of what they do professionally, go right ahead. But don't pretend you've refuted anything. Stres doesn't seem to stop DBTs from being sensitive down to the physical limits of hearing. You have to make forced choices in sighted auditioning, too, and it's just as stressful. As well, some DBTs with long term listening have been done, and the results . . . well, you won't be convinced by them, either!
4. Now, you seem to think professionals are necessary to run DBTs. Why? Well, the answer you give as that somebody might critcize it--and I am sure the subjectivists will be among the first! So what? That doesn't refute anything.
But really, the problem with a number of DBTs done by subjectivists is that they often make up their own invalid methodology: the so-called "blind" tests done by UHF aren't really blind(!), for example. A British magazine doesn't actually do a same/difference audition, but jumps into evaluations right away, writing down whatever comes to mind. Others don't want to do forced choice (although the experts say this actually seems to increase the sensitivity of the tests, contrary to some objections). Others object to quick switching (this is the moment of making the switch, not the length of the selections), even though it makes the test more sensitive, as jj has advised you.
We have said one can't prove the null hypothesis, that is, prove a negative. I really don't think you have thought that through, since a number of times what you really ask us to do is to prove the null hypothesis. The problem is really to disprove the null hypothesis and establish a positive result.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Answers aren't always refutations. - Pat D 07:28:20 05/23/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
