Julf wrote: > As many of the heated arguments seem to stem from loose terminology, I > think it is good to strive towards using precise terms. A test like this > only fails if it doesn't provide any information at all - it is so badly > designed or executed that the results are totally inconclusive. What you > are talking about is "failing to disprove the null hypothesis". > > I think we also need to be clear about the purpose of the test and the > possible results. Even in the best of cases, all it will do is providing > a single data point. It won't "prove" anything, or establish the > "reality" of anything - it will be another small piece of evidence. For > a more general conclusion, approaching "proof" of anything, the test > results need to be independently replicated, under controlled > conditions, and enough times to provide real statistical relevance.
What he said, in other words +1 Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 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
