|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: Re: I don't think you are being realistic at all. posted by PhilNYC on August 22, 2006 at 09:06:22:
"Scott, I do understand and appreciate that my test was very unscientific."
Good. I also hope you understand that that is all anyone I have seen is saying about your test. If you seek a scientific level of certainty then you simply have to improve your protocols and then publish your results. I say this because that is what scientific research involves.
" My understanding of some scientific/statistical testing methodologies is that you begin with a hypothesis, and then you take testing samples to see if you can show with reasonable certainty/confidence that the hypothesis is true or false."
Close. The level of certainty that is widely regarded as acceptable threshold of probablity is 95% ceetainty. But that wasn't the issue with your test.
"In addition to the protocols of the testing method, I wanted to get a sense from people such as yourself if the results of my casual/unscientific test could be perceived as compelling enough to warrant a real scientific test...that is, were the protocols "screwed up enough" to just flat out say that there was nothing there? Or were they interesting enough for someone such as yourself to say "the results, despite the protocols, are interesting enough to warrant further, more rigorous investigation"?"
They were screwed up enough to say that on a scientific level one can not draw any conclusions at all. It says nothing of the actual audibility of the tweak. But the thing is you are not a research scientist. You are in over your head there. I don't mean that as an insult we are almost all in that same boat. If yo are looking for a test that is valid for audiophiles I would say just listen. Listen blind like you did and listen sighted too. In the end decide if you enjoy the experience more with the tweak. If you do and the price is right for the improved listening experience then you did fine. We are audiophiles not scientific researchers. It's not a matter of certainty it's a matter of enjoyment. If we worried about scientific certainty in all of our aesthetic endevours we would never have time to enjoy them. That would be the ultimate in self-defeat. OTOH I think it is healthy to understand that our subjective impressions are just that and nothing more. They may be the result of actual sound or bias effects. Instead of dening them as so many subjectivists do or obsessing over them as so many objectivists do I say live with them. You really don't have the option not to in the end.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: I don't think you are being realistic at all. - Analog Scott 08/22/0610:13:45 08/22/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
