aubuti;582349 Wrote: > That's one reason why real ABX tests do lots of replications. You should > never trust any test with N=1 or N=2. > > Repeat the tests a lot of times, and if that musical nirvana occurs > "predominantly" (for which there are precise statistical definitions) > with one system configuration then you can say that that configuration > is objectively better to your ears (with the 'your ears' part still > containing a lot of subjectivity). If the musical nirvana occurs > randomly with respect to system configuration, then those other factors > such as atmospheric conditions, body chemistry, or whatever have more > influence than the difference in the system configuration.
Sounds reasonable, however, if we do that, then another factor enters the picture -- saturation (or, fatigue). As the experiment progresses, and as the saturation grows, the scales have again been tipped in favor of a biased review. Which throws any hopes for achieving objectivity out the window. No matter how we look at it, we end up with a subjective opinion, which is precisely the same situation we've started with. So in the end, the entire ABX testing amounts to a colossal waste of time. -- magiccarpetride ------------------------------------------------------------------------ magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82600 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
