(Mkuller) wrote:
What about your "well documented" preconceptions and
biases? Do they just disappear when you listen to speakers?


(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:
Certainly not, but I have never failed to obtain 100% scores on the
few occasions when I've tried it with speakers.


Absolutely meaningless.


Nope, it proves the point that the differences are gross. By *your
own* criteria, you must admit this. I am becoming tired of your
continual use of sophistry to avoid meaningful debate. In fact, I'm
becoming tired of this whole ludicrous forum, where ducking, diving
and distortion have become the norm for the 'subjectivists'.


Stewart - here's the rest of my post you failed to answer - once again.

" If you require dbts for any audio component comparison, you should require
them for ALL of them to be consistent. At least the dbts with speakers would
have a
chance at positive results since the differences may be gross. Unlike dbts
with other audio components where the flawed test swamps subtle differences.

Perhaps you could provide some of the so-called "well documented" scientific
research that shows at exactly what point the audible threshold for perceptual
biases swamps *real* differences in sighted listening.

I don't believe flawed dbts with music, audio components and untrained
audiophiles have the proven sensitivity threshold to be valid for subtle
audible differences. IMHO that leaves long term sighted listening (with
careful level matching at the switch) as the only alternative for hearing
*real* subtle audible differences - those other than gross frequency response
and loudness."

It appears to me you are no longer interested in discussing this topic since
I'm raising questions you are unable to answer. My conclusion is that you are
not interested in finding the TRUTH ("you can't handle the truth") but in using
debating tactics and getting in the last word.
Regards,
Mike