|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification posted by bjh on February 9, 2006 at 09:24:44:
Y'all can tell who is listening and who isn't. That's one thing that controls are for.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups Full ThreadTopic - Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - bjh 09:24:44 02/09/06 (80)
- The only qualified listeners are experienced concert goers - Soundmind 15:58:43 02/10/06 (14)
- Time to replace the vintage system if you seek better - E-Stat 18:21:59 02/10/06 (13)
- I've recently heard newere equipment and was not impressed - Soundmind 05:15:46 02/11/06 (12)
- Question - E-Stat 06:01:43 02/11/06 (6)
- Re: Question - Soundmind 06:19:52 02/11/06 (5)
- Probably the Dyna ST-150 box - E-Stat 06:40:14 02/11/06 (4)
- Re: Probably the Dyna ST-150 box - Soundmind 06:58:15 02/11/06 (3)
- Evidently they ran out of original cabinets - E-Stat 07:07:05 02/11/06 (2)
- Nevsky's last battle - Soundmind 07:31:25 02/11/06 (1)
- Funny story ! (nt) - E-Stat 08:31:01 02/11/06 (0)
- Re: I've recently heard newere equipment and was not impressed - bjh 05:44:22 02/11/06 (4)
- Re: I've recently heard newere equipment and was not impressed - Soundmind 05:54:27 02/11/06 (3)
- The truth hurts! But don't worry, everybody hurts somtimes ... :) nt - bjh 06:16:38 02/11/06 (2)
- Re: The truth hurts! But don't worry, everybody hurts somtimes ... :) nt - Soundmind 06:35:44 02/11/06 (1)
- So are YOU qualified. If so, why not try a blind audition and stop being an armchair critic? - Richard BassNut Greene 08:29:49 02/10/06 (15)
- Re: So are YOU qualified. If so, why not try a blind audition and stop being an armchair critic? - bjh 09:29:53 02/10/06 (1)
- Re: So are YOU qualified. If so, why not try a blind audition and stop being an armchair critic? - Pat D 07:11:53 02/16/06 (0)
- Re: So are YOU qualified. If so, why not try a blind audition and stop being an armchair critic? - Brian Cheney 08:44:52 02/10/06 (12)
- Another of your fatally flawed arguements - Soundmind 06:55:12 02/11/06 (1)
- Re: Another of your fatally flawed arguements - Brian Cheney 12:39:37 02/11/06 (0)
- Your post seems to have no connection with blind auditions -- please explain - Richard BassNut Greene 08:59:50 02/10/06 (9)
- Re: Your post seems to have no connection with blind auditions -- please explain - Brian Cheney 10:11:42 02/10/06 (3)
- Why would you be "wrong, delusional, or misguided" if the listerner heard no real difference?... - Guy 05:59:16 02/11/06 (2)
- Re: Why would you be "wrong, delusional, or misguided" if the listerner heard no real difference?... - Brian Cheney 10:15:46 02/11/06 (1)
- Sounds like a prettly delicate distinction, there (the proverbial fine line)* - Guy 05:36:48 02/12/06 (0)
- Solid state amp DBTs... - mkuller 09:47:42 02/10/06 (4)
- Re: Why would the test be at fault from the above results? * - Guy 06:01:50 02/11/06 (3)
- It would expose the listener's 'faults' or rather limitations...... - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 07:12:20 02/11/06 (2)
- Re: All right, so let's say *in theory* a DBT could be constructed... - Guy 05:41:37 02/12/06 (1)
- Re: All right, so let's say *in theory* a DBT could be constructed... - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 12:26:06 02/12/06 (0)
- As an objectivist kind of guy, I agree completely... - andy_c 20:50:26 02/09/06 (1)
- Hey you there! You're thinking: not allowed here!! - Pat D 21:25:23 02/09/06 (0)
- I notice those who reject DBTs the most are those don't understand them - Caymus 19:52:12 02/09/06 (11)
- Those who embrace DBTs are the ones who don't question the validity of the test...(nt) - mkuller 09:53:20 02/10/06 (1)
- Re: No… - $orabji! 23:38:18 02/11/06 (0)
- I notice that many DBT'ers find it easier to suggest those who disagree don't understand when they just don't agree. [n - chris.redmond2@bushinternet.com 08:54:01 02/10/06 (1)
- Re: I notice that those who notice that those who fail to notice should be given notice * - Guy 05:47:35 02/11/06 (0)
- Not true… - David Aiken 22:32:13 02/09/06 (3)
- Agreed - E-Stat 13:54:35 02/10/06 (2)
- Re: Agreed - Pat D 20:08:11 02/10/06 (1)
- Don't hold your breath - E-Stat 06:27:04 02/11/06 (0)
- Re: I notice those who reject DBTs the most are those don't understand them - bjh 20:05:11 02/09/06 (2)
- Re: I notice those who reject DBTs the most are those don't understand them - Caymus 21:33:30 02/09/06 (1)
- Re: I notice those who reject DBTs the most are those don't understand them - bjh 22:32:03 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - soulfood 17:36:29 02/09/06 (3)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - bjh 19:55:42 02/09/06 (2)
- please post a link - TommyK 08:10:00 02/10/06 (1)
- Re: please post a link - bjh 09:40:56 02/10/06 (0)
- Look up "control conditions", hows about? - Silver Eared John 17:24:34 02/09/06 (1)
- Re: Look up "control conditions", hows about? - Pat D 21:43:26 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - Lynn 16:51:00 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - David Aiken 16:44:11 02/09/06 (1)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - bjh 19:25:21 02/09/06 (0)
- Why do these schemes always presume an adversarial relationship? - lanny 12:23:01 02/09/06 (4)
- Re: Why do these schemes always presume an adversarial relationship? - bjh 12:39:41 02/09/06 (3)
- nice one! - Bruce from DC 13:08:44 02/09/06 (2)
- Keep thinking, you've almost got it . . . - Pat D 16:09:47 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: nice one! - middleground 15:41:03 02/09/06 (0)
- You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - Pat D 12:12:02 02/09/06 (10)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - bjh 12:29:10 02/09/06 (9)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - Pat D 16:06:14 02/09/06 (8)
- Re: How snide. (With little else of redeeming value) - Guy 05:36:49 02/11/06 (2)
- No, I'm just suggesting he start thinking about the problem. - Pat D 09:26:14 02/11/06 (1)
- Thanks for the benefit of your explanation - not how I read it * - Guy 05:38:33 02/12/06 (0)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - bjh 16:24:17 02/09/06 (4)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - Pat D 21:59:08 02/09/06 (3)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - bjh 22:36:23 02/09/06 (2)
- Re: You're showing a modicum of thought, here, but . . . - Pat D 23:35:11 02/09/06 (1)
- Re: Le'ts all bid a goodbye to Mr. Sell-out * - Guy 05:39:41 02/11/06 (0)
- "An audiophile sounds off... - Hepcat 11:52:10 02/09/06 (2)
- Interesting ... - bjh 17:08:32 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: "An audiophile sounds off... - Pat D 12:18:30 02/09/06 (0)
- Is it not axiomatic that in DB tests - clifff 11:47:27 02/09/06 (1)
- Shhhhhhh...... nt - clarkjohnsen 15:12:49 02/09/06 (0)
- Many sceptics agree with you, as do I. [nt] - Wellfed 10:47:13 02/09/06 (0)
- Hey, what do you know. I still disagree with you. - Mudcat 10:08:45 02/09/06 (0)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - Pjay 09:51:24 02/09/06 (2)
- Re: Blind Tests - Listener Qualification - bjh 10:54:39 02/09/06 (1)
- yup textus nongratus - Pjay 11:58:50 02/09/06 (0)
Follow Ups
- Look up "control conditions", hows about? - Silver Eared John 17:24:34 02/09/06 (1)
- Re: Look up "control conditions", hows about? - Pat D 21:43:26 02/09/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
