Gandhi wrote: > Ah, yes. I misread the definition of the Galatea effect. I thought it > just was about underperforming (which I thought was odd), but I see now > that it also is about succeeding. > > And I must confess I often equate cynisism with realism. > > An objective component review would indeed be hard with ABX. I have > always been suspicious of ABX, as it, from a purely practical > standpoint, simply is too difficult to manage. It's almost as hard as > doing a doubleblind study on the effects of oil massage. Fugedaboudit. I > think a more fruitful way is to measure, measure and measure again. We > would perhaps need to develop more methods of testing. For instance some > people seem to believe that single test tones are not enough. Maybe they > have a point. Well, then develop a different method to investigate that. > It's not just about proving things, it's also about explaining why it is > a proof to the people that don't have the background to understand it by > themselves. And hearing/seeing is believing. Never waste time with > subjectivities. Always find hard facts and build on those. Yada yada. > (Why do these discussions always come to this?) > > But I actually believe the optimal testing method is already since long > invented; the null test. It's extremely powerful, but more importantly; > it's also extremely transparent. Everyone understands it and it's hard > to argue that the test is inadequate, when you actually measure the > entire audio content of some complex piece of music and compare this to > the source. What could possibly be missed? And if you get a difference > at the -120dB level, this would be very difficult to hear. It's easily > tested, just attenuate a sound in a sound editor by that amount and see > if you can hear it with the volume knob unchanged. If you can, then add > a masking noise and we're done. > > By the way, doing a null test with the the entire audio chain would be > very unforgiving. There is a reason that we never see distortion figures > for speakers, in the way that we do for amps. Not to mention the > listening room.
There is the wonderfull audiodiffmaker program for this :) compare >120dB zeros with for examle trying to hear anything attenuated -120dB at your listening position good luck with that , or listen to the residue signal itself ! .Afaik the arguments about test tones falls a bit short if you also measure i'm with at least two tones , then you covered all bases as i believe fourier was quite rigth any complex tone is composed of several sine components -------------------------------------------------------------------- Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad (in storage SB3, reciever ,controller ) server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101733 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
