Skunk;202906 Wrote: > If this went to court, you wouldn't be allowed on the jury :-) > > I.e. couldn't the expectation to hear no difference mask actual > differences? I believe you also brainwashed PhilNYC!
I'd be an an expert witness for the prosecution :-). An expectation bias is possible in my case, although I tried really hard to hear something. And I wasn't at all sure what to expect - if I had been I wouldn't have gone to all the trouble to do this. And Phil *certainly* wasn't expecting this result - just the contrary - and our third listener was ambivalent to begin with. There's probably a better way to do this kind of test, which is to determine a threshold rather than a yes or no. For example if you could take the signal coming from the TP and the one coming from the SB, take their difference, and use that to create a signal where the difference was magnified many times, you could then gradually reduce the difference back towards the actual level and see at what point it ceased to be audible. While purists could always argue that this process introduced garbage that made the result meaningless, if the answer was that the difference needed to be magnified many times over it would still be pretty convincing (to non-fanatics at least). Actually that's maybe not such a bad idea - after all, whatever garbage is introduced can only make it easier to distinguish between the original and the new signal. So take two signals, say SB and TP. Compare pure SB to SB + g(TP-SB), starting with g>>1. Now gradually reduce g, and see at what g you can no longer distinguish. If it's at, say, g=10, that's pretty compelling. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=35068 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
