Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: I agree - but it works both ways.

"Well, some DBT proponents are out to prove that all audio equipment sounds the same, in which case they are entitled to their labcoats and $100 best buy stereo systems."

So, who are those people? I can't think of anyone here who is "out to prove" any such thing. Of course, some attribute that sort of motivation to those they disagree with . . .

"Others want to devalue sighted listening auditions in general, the reasons being for this vary."

Of course, here you are taking carcass93's formulation (which is hardly original with him), which is hugely ambiguous. The big confusion is between determining whether one can detect audible differences between pieces of equipment, and determining a preference for a piece of equipment. If one is not particularly interested in establishing one can actually detect an audible difference between two pieces of equipment (which can be taken for granted with speakers, anyway), then there is no need to do blind tests or compare measurements with known thresholds. Actually using the equipment is certainly a way of forming preferences for equipment, and I highly recommend it. After all, there is not much point in buying equipment you don't like.

"I think objectivists are far too quick to throw away the benefits of sighted listening, aural training and attempts to listen sighted without being biased. (Then again, some say that's not possible, yet most people audition and purchase gear this way)."

I can't think of anyone who denies the benefits of training. Indeed, one of mkuller's objections to audio DBTs is the fact that audio DBTs are more sensitibe with trained subjects, unlike those medidal DBTs with which he is familiar.

The situation usually presented is that someone (i.e., a reviewer or other audiophile) he/she can detect the differences between the sound of various pieces of equipment. Interconnects and speaker cables are hardly the most egregious examples since they are in the signal path. Without supporting evidence, there is ordinarily no reason to believe such claims, not with 2-4 interconnects at line level or 10-12 foot speaker cables suitable for high fidelity use. And I suggest and will continue to suggest that people do not give any credence to such unsupported claims. On the other hand, if someone prefers some audio jewellery, that's fine with me.

That does not prevent anyone from doing their own auditioning in whatever manner they deem appropriate.

"As for subjectivists, some seem to get hung up on the "null result" hypothesis and completely dismiss DBTs and all other forms of blind testing as 'irrelevant to audio'. The extremist from both camps, IMHO, are missing the picture."

Quite a number simply misrepresent the matter. I can't think of anyone who thinks one can prove the null hypothesis in an audio DBT.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Parts Connexion  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]