In Reply to: Re: What are we here for? posted by john curl on October 30, 2003 at 10:19:14:
I agree that ABX has a flaw.
The flaw is that amature statisticians use a chi-square or S-T test to compare the results without an understanding of "Power of Study."
Power of Study, briefly is a mathematical estimation of how many trials will be necessary to expect a statistically significant result.
The variation of results is high in audio testing. If you ran an ABX where X is always A, you would get some variation in responses. If the variation within the groups is almost as high as the difference between groups, then you will need to do a very high amount of tests to separate the noise of the test from the data. That would be quite tedious - so it is probably not reasonable.
I haven't calculated a Power of Study since residency, but I would not be surprized if most differences we are talking about would require 1000 loudness matched X's.
There are things that should minimize the noise: Experience of the listener, hearing acuity of the listener, familiarity with the music played, etc.I am curious to know why you have not liked the ABX.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- ABX has a flaw, I agree. - ophth 10/30/0312:35:07 10/30/03 (27)
- Re: ABX has a flaw, I agree. - john curl 10:07:30 10/31/03 (20)
- OK. - ophth 14:02:40 10/31/03 (19)
- Re: OK. - Ted Smith 14:16:20 10/31/03 (18)
- Re: OK. - john curl 17:09:15 10/31/03 (17)
- Any interest?? - ophth 13:36:38 11/4/03 (15)
- They aren't very sensitive (long) - JCA 15:33:02 11/4/03 (9)
- Re: They aren't very sensitive - I agree. - ophth 22:01:20 11/4/03 (7)
- The problem is the wrong question - Commuteman 10:18:02 11/5/03 (3)
- Re: The problem is the wrong question - ophth 12:22:47 11/5/03 (2)
- We're saying the same thing - Commuteman 12:31:06 11/5/03 (1)
- Re: We're saying the same thing - ophth 17:15:51 11/5/03 (0)
- Re: They aren't very sensitive - I agree. - JCA 03:55:00 11/5/03 (2)
- Nicely said. nt - clarkjohnsen 08:37:48 11/6/03 (0)
- Re: They aren't very sensitive - I agree. - john curl 10:01:45 11/5/03 (0)
- Re: They aren't very sensitive (long) - john curl 16:02:51 11/4/03 (0)
- Re: Any interest?? - Ted Smith 13:54:02 11/4/03 (4)
- Accounting for seredipidy - ophth 12:34:36 11/5/03 (3)
- Thanks, guys. nt - ophth 22:20:54 11/5/03 (0)
- Re: Accounting for seredipidy - Ted Smith 13:18:02 11/5/03 (0)
- Re: Accounting for seredipidy - JCA 13:13:43 11/5/03 (0)
- Re: OK. - ophth 21:10:36 10/31/03 (0)
- Re: ABX has a flaw, I agree. - okiemax 20:27:11 10/30/03 (5)
- Variation - ophth 08:04:53 10/31/03 (4)
- Re: Variation - okiemax 07:37:07 11/1/03 (3)
- Re: Variation - ophth 17:47:09 11/1/03 (2)
- I think you've nailed it - Commuteman 10:25:28 11/5/03 (1)
- Re: I think you've nailed it - ophth 12:31:19 11/5/03 (0)