Archimago wrote:
> Depends on the question being asked, doesn't it? Plus it's fun getting
> folks involved in trying something for themselves...
>
> Besides, so long as one *acknowledges the limitations openly*, it's left
> to the reader how they interpret results.Yes, I would agree if your
> acknowledgement of the limitations were
balanced.
Ok, so let's see how _balanced_ you are with these limitations:
On the 24bit Vs 16bit blind test you say -"Limitations of the study
includes the fact that this was an open test distributed via the
Internet in an uncontrolled fashion.
_This_allowed_the_opportunity_for_test_subjects_to_analyze_the_audio_files_objectively_rather_than_through_pure_listening_.
"
So the only limitation I can see you highlighting is that the test might
be cheated. No discussion of the fact that home blind testing is
unsuitable for perceptual testing.
This lack of balance crops up in your conclusions also:
-*"In a naturalistic survey of 140 respondents using high quality
musical samples sourced from high-resolution 24/96 digital audio
collected over 2 months,
_there_was_no_evidence_that_24-bit_audio_could_be_appreciably_differentiated_from_the_same_music_dithered_down_to_16-bits_using_a_basic_algorithm_
('Adobe' (http://www.adobe.com/) Audition 3, flat triangular dither, 0.5
bits)."
*-Really? No evidence? What about the
_20_respondents_who_correctly_identified_the_B-A-A_selection_? You
entertain no possibility in your article that these are anything other
than the expected number of correct guesses "​Looking at the
individual responses, there were a total of 20 respondents who correctly
identified the B-A-A selection of 24-bit samples, and 21 selected the
opposite A-B-B. This too is in line with expectations that 17.5 would
pick each of these patterns based on chance alone."
-YOUR MATHS IS INCORRECT - THAT 17.5 OUT OF 140 IS THE EXPECTED NUMBER
OF CORRECT GUESSES FOR THIS TEST. TELL US WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY OF
GUESSING 3 CORRECT ANSWERS OUT OF 6 CHOICES? AND THEN TELL US HOW MANY
RESPONDENTS OUT OF 140 SHOULD BE CORRECT DUE TO GUESSING. -
In the comments Solderdude (a well known objectivist) said "Playing the
role of 'subjectivists advocate'
_the_conclusion:_'there_was_no_evidence_that_24-bit_audio_could_be_appreciably_differentiated_from_the_same_music_dithered_down_to_16-bits_using_a_basic_algorithm_'
may not be shared by the 15% who gave the correct answers."
"-We will never know IF the people that gave the correct answers truly
HEARD the differences or just guessed or analysed the files correctly-.
*This could only be done in a controlled environment with those who
answered correctly with a statistic more relevant blind test*."
You did reply to him "Good idea with the 20; I'll see about putting
something together..." Have you followed this up?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
jkeny's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35192
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103842
_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
