garym wrote: > And without getting two bogged down in statistics, when one runs > multiple tests, the p-values have to be adjusted to account for this. > (think of the idea that one asserts he can correctly predict heads or > tails in a coin flip 10 times in a row. If one runs this test enough > times, eventually in one of the tests, the subject will be able to > predict heads/tails 10 times in a row.
Ok, I tested the same track as this morning again. This time I tried to be more focused and clicked the answer only when I was really sure. Is a p-value of 1.1% in the second shot enough to eliminate the doubts on the first with 5.5%? I suspect that it could be so easy for me to judge this track because I'm playing the piano myself. Probably I know how to listen to it. And there is nothing hi-res here. No matter how you treat a piano (if your aim still is music making), there is not much left above 12kHz. And on top of all, I created this last log on my laptop's headphone out with a standard Sennheiser in-ear plug. There are other tracks where I gloriously fail. But nevertheless, I never thought that I would be able to distinguish FLAC and 320kbps. Honestly I was a bit afraid that I wouldn't. Now I'm happy and - at least under certain circumstances - I do hear a difference. Maybe I should see a doc concerning this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome ;-) +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Filename: Roll2.txt | |Download: http://forums.slimdevices.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=14671| +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98374 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
