General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

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: Funny thing

Posted by geoffkait on May 5, 2012 at 14:36:05:
The whole problem ABX or really with any kind of test is that if the results are negative it doesn't prove anything. The sometimes suspect the real reason for the existence of ABX testing is so objectivists can use it as a virtual weapon in the jihad against cables, expensive speakers, and weird tweaks - "that thing couldn't possibly pass an ABX test." I also happen think that long term listening has a big problem --most audiophiles, and perhaps especially reviewers, are continually changing cables, electronics, adding and/or removing tweaks, And waiting for things to break in, and so forth. Obviously, the sound is subject to change over time in these cases, not necessarily for the better. And It's very easy to lose track of what the heck is going on. I'm more in favor of A/B/A testing, at least then you can eliminate all the unknowns involved with long term listening.