|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.255.209.123
In Reply to: RE: Finally, a breath of fresh air. posted by green heron on March 13, 2015 at 13:28:35
The medical community was forced down this road to eliminate quackery...
There are, however, significant differences between medical trials and audio trials:
1. In medicine the training, experience and test-taking abilities of the subjects do NOT affect the results of the test.
In audio they all DO. So it is as much of a test of the listeners than differences between the components alone. Harman, for example, trains their speaker evaluators who use the "shuffler". Follow Sean Olive's blog for details.
2. In medicine, the participants don't compare anything. There are administered either the the control or a placebo.
In audio, one must make a forced choice between two different DUT.
3. In medicine the tests have been scientifically validated for this use.
In blind audio component comparisons, there has been NO validation. The sensitivity of the tests for different sonic parameters has not been determined. That's because the sensitivity changes with each subject (see #1).
For some reason, in high-end audio, there are arguments against the scientific method.
Only to the application of pseudo-science. Lack of controls and myriad assumptions are regularly made with them. Such as the farcical Meyer-Moron test on audibility of high resolution recordings.
Follow Ups:
My friend,I have been using this exact same argument for years against those who claim to have finally had a " Breath of Fresh Air " after being exposed to the supposed "truth" about audio from one of the various naysayers out there who espouses what they already believe! The funny part is these folks who comment about finally obtaining a " Breath of Fresh Air" usually do so after being out on a country farm and opening their bedroom window ---{ which faces the pig farm next door }--- first thing in the morning! So with their window wide open they take a deep breath of that clean country air! Which unbeknownst to them has passed through and over the numerous pig stys next door before reaching the window of their country farm! While this air definitely has the fragrance of country air, fresh ---{ or truthful }--- it is not!
You might enjoy reading my original post about audio vs medical DBTs posted here in A.A. 7 years ago! There's even a link within this post which goes back further in my debate about this topic! Again BRAVO E-stat my friend, for your post...
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom Scata)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
Edits: 03/18/15
I leveraged a lot of comments that Mike Kuller has previously posted about the topic.
In any event, medical tests bear little resemblance to that of audio tests. I see that The Audio Hobby pestered your post. I also had some hilarious exchanges with him. :)
Hello Again!
Although I cannot say for sure, it's quite possible I also garnered some ideas from Mike Kuller while stockpiling info about Audio vs Medical DBTs. I do remember doing quite a bit of research at that time before posting. In any event it's good to see you representing the truth about Audio DBTs here!
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom Scata)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
All worthy points...of course there are listener differences, I'd hope these factors could be controlled for, if desired. That said, we can't assume that every individual difference is a material difference--many experiments show this isn't the case, (I don't think that anyone would argue that all perceived differences are material). Only speaking for myself, I want to ensure I have procedures in place with my own system to ferret out material differences from illusions. I've experienced both.
I'd hope these factors could be controlled for, if desired.
Agreed. Unfortunately, you rarely find studies where that is done.
I don't think that anyone would argue that all perceived differences are material.
Such depends on the listener. What one person finds barely noticeable could be more significant to another.
That they exist is sometimes actually questioned. And ridiculed, for some odd reason.
Thanks for pointing out those differences...your case is well made.
I come professionally from the PHarma industry and I also get annoyed when people in audio try to claim its the same as clinical trials for medicine...it is absolutely false.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: