In Reply to: IOW DBTs are only valid if you agree with the results posted by Analog Scott on March 19, 2008 at 07:43:04:
In addition the results also only apply to the day of the test.
People who use blind auditions because they want to eliminate expectations and SPL differences, don't claim YOU would have the same results.
They merely point out that over three decades, not one audiophile has even come close to the "everything sounds different" claims of subjective auditions when brand names were hidden and SPL's were matched.
That's valuable information for all audiophiles to consider, although a rude poster like you will dismiss all evidence that contradicts your "everything sounds different to my ears, and I don't need no stinkin' test to prove it, because I couldn't be wrong" beliefs, because all fools dismiss contradictory information because they prefer the comfort of their simple never-proven claims about their own superior hearing ability.
.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
"I know what I hear" is often an audio fantasyland
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Actually DBT's are only valid for the participants, equipment and recordings used - Richard BassNut Greene 03/19/0807:57:42 03/19/08 (26)
- "In addition the results also only apply to the day of the test." - pburant 09:32:26 03/19/08 (1)
- If people are wild guessing about A or B the results are likely to vary slightly each time a test is done - Richard BassNut Greene 09:41:54 03/19/08 (0)
- irony sets in. By your logic you can't recomend anything based on DBTs. - Analog Scott 09:01:12 03/19/08 (23)
- You assume Risch is honest - Richard BassNut Greene 09:44:46 03/19/08 (22)
- No you assume he is dishonest because you don't like his results - Analog Scott 09:51:06 03/19/08 (21)
- What results? - AJinFLA 20:18:16 03/20/08 (4)
- Do you know who you are talking to? - Analog Scott 13:53:27 03/23/08 (3)
- I'm talking to make up artist Analog Scott - AJinFLA 14:14:41 03/23/08 (2)
- i see you just don't understand simple English - Analog Scott 14:24:45 03/23/08 (1)
- Indeed I have not picked and chosen "them" - AJinFLA 15:06:38 03/23/08 (0)
- Bogus extraordinary unwitnessed claims that no one else in the world has claimed ... are not "test results" - Richard BassNut Greene 10:02:37 03/19/08 (15)
- Your attacks on Risch are truly pathetic. - Analog Scott 10:19:02 03/19/08 (14)
- "you don't like the results" . - AJinFLA 20:21:10 03/20/08 (7)
- Why don't you aks the guy who came up with them or the guy objecting to them? - Analog Scott 13:54:41 03/23/08 (6)
- I am asking you Scotty. What "Results"? We'll understand if you are forced to do what you do best - AJinFLA 14:21:14 03/23/08 (5)
- RE: I am asking you Scotty. What "Results"? We'll understand if you are forced to do what you do best - Analog Scott 14:36:25 03/23/08 (4)
- "the results that Jon Risch came up with" - AJinFLA 15:19:04 03/23/08 (3)
- There are no results -- just unbelievable claims about what wire insulators sound best on a website - Richard BassNut Greene 07:05:16 03/24/08 (2)
- Makeup Artistry? (nt) - AJinFLA 15:16:32 03/24/08 (0)
- RE: Thanks for the data. - rick_m 08:34:52 03/24/08 (0)
- I question extraordinary hearing ability claims with no witnesses no matter who makes them. - Richard BassNut Greene 09:34:26 03/20/08 (5)
- RBG Question's Anyones Hearing Ability, Even With Witnesses If He Doesn't Like The Results - thetubeguy1954 08:48:13 03/21/08 (2)
- You claimed you could hear cable differences with brand namers hidden, but did no blind test to prove it - Richard BassNut Greene 12:13:18 03/21/08 (1)
- RE: You claimed you could hear cable differences with brand namers hidden, but did no blind test to prove it - thetubeguy1954 12:59:57 03/21/08 (0)
- RE: extraordinary hearing ability claims. - rick_m 18:47:03 03/20/08 (0)
- What then of substantiated claims? - E-Stat 12:15:37 03/20/08 (0)