Julf wrote: > Absolutely. > > Of course not. But they will not be accepted as absolute proof of > anything either.I expect Archi will be careful in usual level-matching, etc. > & I'm sure he will do some informal blind listening too so I'm pretty sure he wont go ahead with statistical blind tests unless he is sure about these listening impressions.
> I agree - if no differences are heard in sighted listening, a > double-blind test won't add any value. Double-blind listening is > required to verify the results only if differences are really heard in > sighted listening.No, it's more than this - a specific audible element needs > to be identified - not just "I think I can hear a difference so let's see in a blind test if I can". A specific element to focus on needs to be established & this focus retained while doing a blind test. > But sighted listening doesn't trump double-blind listening either. > > Indeed. If properly controlled listening tests - both double-blind and > sighted - show statistically significant differences, then there is > indeed a case to be made that there might be differences that the > measurements don't reveal.Right! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
