P Floding;180603 Wrote: > In order to calculate probabilities you need some kind of measurable > targets. The problem with "plausability" in hifi is that there is > little agreement on what can and cannot be heard. But lets leave it at > that, because I can feel someone will now claim that there exists some > "authority" in audio research...
That wasn't quite what I was getting at. You start off with your priors, do some tests, which will change a bunch of probabilities (since many of the priors you assigned will be conditional, either directly or transitively, on the values which were changed by doing the test). Presto change-o, new probability/plausibility assessments. No appeal to authority is necessary here. The only thing to argue about is the priors: I suppose that is actually perhaps a big thing :). -- totoro squeezebox 3 -> mccormack dna .5 -> audio physic tempo 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ totoro's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=5935 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32352 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
