opaqueice;373029 Wrote: > They're usually done that way for two reasons: > > 1) Some research has shown that subtle differences are much -easier- to > hear when the clips are short, and > > 2) It takes less time that way. > > There is no reason in the world why it can't be done with longer clips > - the ABX format is perfectly compatible with that. Personally, I've > done a number of ABX tests using a computer program (for example, to > hear the difference between MP3 and WAV). In my experience it's much > easier to hear the differences when you first identify a section where > it's potentially audible and then switch back and forth rapidly on that > section. It's possible other types of effects are easier to hear over a > long term, but I'm not aware of any reason to think so other than the > (more or less worthless) word of audio manufacturers hawking their > wares. > > > > That's another old canard, which is not only obviously false (these > tests have been used for decades in research to establish hearing > thresholds, and if what you said were true those thresholds would all > be zero, an obvious absurdity), but disposed of in 30 seconds of > googling (many DBTs just in high-end audio falsify what you said). > > Of course we've had this discussion before and you're still repeating > the same falsehood, so I can only assume you have an agenda. Why is it that you always stoop to personal abuse?
-- 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=56425 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
