ralphpnj wrote: > I'm confused. Isn't the purpose of a double blind test to determine if > there is, in fact, a difference and not, as the above would have it, to > determine if one can find/hear/see/feel/sense an -*existing*- (or least > prejudged) difference.The purpose of a blind test is to eliminate as far as > possible biases, influences on our auditory perception - the main one being the cognitive bias that is cited as being the result of knowing what we are testing. If you think that you can do a blind test without having first isolated & nailed down what you think are the specific differences between two devices then I will put money on you to fail every time when subtle differences are being tested for. > I mean if everyone knows and admits that is a difference, such as would > be the case of music played back using a pair of inexpensive small two > way bookshelf speakers versus a pair of very expensive, large three way > floor standing speakers, then what is the point of doing a (pointless) > double blind test.Well gross differences are not usually blind tested but > rather the preference ranking for such gross differences - again the sighted evaluation of such speakers is shown to lead to a perception of larger differences than are found when blind tested - The Harmon blind tests show this.
> Add into all of this confusion the fact that as these DBTs have been > described over the course of the past 20 or so prior posts, these DBTs > would be used to determined if a given individual (jh901 in this case) > can hear a difference and leaves out entire part of DBTs about the > results being statistically significant and such.As in, so okay some > audiophile somewhere can correctly tell he difference 70% of the time > between an mp3, a 16bit/44.1kHz wav and a 24bit/192kHz wav file. Isn't > the real issue where or not a statistically significant amount of people > can correctly tell the difference a statistically significant percentage > of the time?Huh? It's jh901's claims (as this is what he is setting himself > up for) that are being tested here. And, if it's going to be used as some sort of "proof" that jh901 can indeed differentiate between his silver cable & some cheap copper one, then he will be asked to produce statistically significant results which requires multiple tests - I believe 12 is the minimum but perhaps 15 will be called for. But I don't expect that it will ever get that far because anyone who knows how to do blind testing of any rigour will know not to waste their time on this - sorry jh901 > Again, I'm confused.No doubt Arny will now contradict everything I've just > said & confuse you more :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jkeny's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35192 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
