In Reply to: Re: Please don't make new myth. posted by Jon Risch on April 23, 2003 at 22:00:20:
I have written documents, contributed to documents, etc, on how to do listening tests. You can get them from the appropriate agencies, as well as get other methods and such from a variety of sources. Why should I write the same book over again, here, to a hostile audience who makes whoppers like " If amplitude is all you seek, then amplitude is all you will find, and the test method will revolve around that concept"?In fact, you are misrepresenting the history here, as well, as I have quite a while ago discussed quite a few issues about how to do listening tests. As all we have, up to and including your article, is the same old stuff, I see no reason to give you or others who will not learn from older work any more time and effort.
You can search the database here, go do it.
Now, I have not tried to write a comprehensive article on "how to do tests" because it's of book length. It's not simple, and it's clear that people here wouldn't even read it, and most of those who did would respond with an endless stream of unsupported suppositions and complaints.
Finally, your claim about "classic ABX". Provide evidence. Please. I want to see it. (For results in a DBT, please, not any kind of sighted test like you also seem to allow in your article.)
-- Do not seek the treasure! DO NOT SEEK THE TREASURE!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Jon, that's false. - jj 18:48:51 04/24/03 (1)
- Re: Jon, that's false. - Jon Risch 15:51:52 05/02/03 (0)