tommypeters;465819 Wrote: > The problem with double-blind tests can be illustrated by the triangle > below: > > [image: http://www.eyetricks.com/0406.gif] > > ...and also by the black dots (how many are they, try to count them) > here: > > [image: http://eyetricks.com/0101.gif] > > When changing back-and-forth between different equipment your ears will > start to fool you the same way as your eyes in the illustrations above. > Because it's neither your ears nor your eyes, but your brain that does > the fooling. If there's no easily-detected distortion, but rather "lack > of information", your ears will soon fill that in and you will seemingly > switch back-and-forth between similar-sounding audio. > > Meridian did a test of double-blind tests and concluded that they > couldn't use it for internal tests. And since internal tests aren't to > prove anything for anyone it's perfectly alright for them to use other > methods. But for a reviewer, while flawed, double-blind tests may still > be the way to go. But he/she should take them for what they're worth.
yes, that's why I don't believe in quick A/B double blind tests, or even in just non-scientific testing with quick A/B switches. -- firedog Tranquil PC fanless server running SqueezeCenter; SB Duet through Empirical Audio Pace Car; TACT 2.2XP; MF X-150,Sonus Faber Concerto; Mirage MS-12 sub; Dual 506 + Ortofon 20 (occasional use); sometimes use PC with M-Audio 192 as digital source. SB Boom in bedroom. Arcam CD82 which I don't use anymore, even though it's a very good player. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ firedog's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11550 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=67679 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
