|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
173.215.206.130
In Reply to: RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. posted by Pat D on July 22, 2010 at 08:43:20
Wow Pat, really? On this thread of all threads?
"For example, you show me products whose performance differs by the amounts shown in the ABX matching criteria, and I'll accept some can detect the differences."
I showed you two of them in my OP.
Let the flawed meta-analysis begin again on the thread about flawed meta-analysis of many objectivists. I am enjoying the irony of it. call it a guilty pleasure. Please Pat, entertain me some more. tell us what you don't like about cited ABX DBTs that wrought undesired results. Please, unwittingly engage in cherry picking right before our eyes on a thread about cherry picking.
Follow Ups:
Pat D
"For example, you show me products whose performance differs by the amounts shown in the ABX matching criteria, and I'll accept some can detect the differences."AS
"I showed you two of them in my OP."Really? What were the differences in the frequency responses?
The point of my remark was that if the FR differences were large enough, blind testing would not be needed to convince me they sounded different. We would already know the differences are audible based on previous blind tests.
What are undesired results in DBTs? DBTs results are data. They are what they are. Data needs to be interpreted and sometimes interpretations are made that are too strong. In one respect, I agree with Tony Lauck, in that I don't primarily look for null results, I look for positive ones that can stand scrutiny.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
Edits: 07/23/10
"The point of my remark was that if the FR differences were large enough, blind testing would not be needed to convince me they sounded different. We would already know the differences are audible based on previous blind tests."
Did you write that?
You are so funny.
Translation: if others tell me that the differences are large enough, then I'll say they are large enough. :)
rw
before you guys look at it! I already linked it, too.
If the frequency response differences are greater than shown on the curves, then the differences should be audible for someone.
If the frequency response differences are under amounts indicated on those curves, then they may or may not be audible, so I would want a blind test to confirm any claims they are. Of course, there may be other things which would indicate an audible difference, noise, for instance, but then I would want to see that shown, too, before I accept the claim.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
Here's a hint: it isn't the "substance" of your point....
rw
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: