opaqueice;221104 Wrote: > It's *exactly* the same thing! Look - on an ABX test you could ignore B > and simply listen to A and X. Then you only have to decide if they're > different or not. That's the type of test you seem convinced is > better, and it's one of several techniques you could choose as the > testee. > > > > One of the nice things about well-designed ABX tests is that they give > the listener control over that - you can select which part you want to > listen to, and for how long, and you can switch whenever you want > between A, B, and X. So you can zero in on the most demanding sections > if you choose. > > These tests give every possible advantage to the listener, because the > goal is usually to identify the threshold of human hearing under ideal > conditions. If you are determined to force your test procedure on every subject without considering it's appropriateness, then you will get unreliable results. But they'll be your results and you can be happy in their complete (in)accuracy and your complete ignorance.
You can't be scientific if you don't question things and change your opinions in the fact of changed facts, so I'm done treating you as such. -- Patrick Dixon www.at-tunes.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Patrick Dixon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=90 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37553 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
