cliveb;184336 Wrote: > Not sure you quite got the point I was trying to make. (If you did, and > I've misunderstood your reply, then my apologies). > > What I was trying to get at is that it seems entirely plausible to me > that while an ABX test using the full signal might yield a negative > result (meaning that there is no audible difference while listening to > actual music), it is quite possible that this difference test will > produce a positive result. The flat-earthers will then latch onto that > result to support their claims that the difference they think they hear > is real, and therefore proves that ABX is flawed.
If the difference test (DT) gives a positive and the A/B/X gives a negative result, this doesn't mean A/B/X is flawed, obviously. It just means it may not be as sensitive. Anyway, if the difference test gives positive results, why would you or anyone feel the need to defend A/B/X? I would just suggest dropping it and adopting the DT as the gold standard of, let's say, "objective-subjective" testing (because it's really a bit of both). I believe in A/B/X, but only as a means to an end. As a scientist, I know that if you can't get the measurement you want with Method A, you move on to Method B, C, or X as quickly as possible. -- ezkcdude DIY projects page: http://www.ezdiyaudio.com System: SB3->EZDAC->MIT Terminator 2 interconnects->Endler Audio 24-step Attenuators (RCA-direct)->Parasound Halo A23 125W/ch amplifier->Speltz anti-cables->DIY 2-ways + Dayton Titanic 10" subwoofer He's not hi-fi, he's my stereo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ezkcdude's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2545 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33127 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
