Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Re: The Inquisition Continues

Posted by John Atkinson on March 25, 2007 at 04:31:07:
>Your point here is self-defeating, "audible differences that are
>small in absolute terms" will not be any easier to detect in a
>sighted test, the results will just a lot less reliable as a result
>of uncontrolled listener bias.

It depends on the nature of the difference, the conditions of the
blind test, and the conditions of the sighted test. When real
differences exist, an endless series of inadequate blind tests that
produce null results, a la Tom Nousaine, is meaningless.

This was the point of the parable I related at the HE2005 debate,
reprinted at www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/705awsi.
The differences between the amplifiers under test had not been
detected by the formal blind test but had been under normal, sighted,
longer-term listening.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile