Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

To be entirely clear the Retraction I mention should come from you.

We have now seem the relevant quote from one of Atkinson's sources and it clearly makes mention on the usage of music in the test. Now bearing that in mind let's examine some of what you said to Atkinson on this matter in posts here (in all cases emphasis added by me):

It is not clear (at least not to those without access to the BAS Speaker issue you cite) how you have arrived at these figures, and so quite on the contrary it seems like this claim is totally false , given that the only test results that I've been able to attribute to Lipshitz involving music gave a 60/113=53% result: see link. Am I incorrect in connecting your claim to this particular study or are you incorrect in making your claim?

this post


Again the relevant quote from Atkinson's source:

"The authors have demonstrated the two-tone experiment described above to numerous people on different systems. No one has ever failed to hear the timbral change with phase, and discern the polarity reversal on this signal with unvarying accuracy. Indeed, in a double-blind demonstration to eleven members of the SMWTMS audio group [13], the accuracy score was 100% on the summed 200-Hz and 400-Hz tones over loudspeakers, and overall, including musical excerpts, the results on the audibility of the polarity inversion of both loudspeaker channels were 84 correct responses out of 137, this representing confidence of more than 99% in the thesis that acoustic polarity reversal is audible."


So while Atkinson wrote "on music to a 99% confidence limit" when to be entirely correct he might have written "on music and special signals to a 99% confidence limit" to say what he wrote was totally false is manifest hyperbole.

Morevoer of the test mentioned in the relevant quote we have, "84 correct responses out of 137, this representing confidence of more than 99% , which clearly is different than the test you mentioned, i.e. "given that the only test results that I've been able to attribute to Lipshitz involving music gave a 60/113 .

Finally I would like to finish by examining what you suggested to Atkinson as corrective for the totally false content in the 1988 article:

1. "Work by Stanley Lipshitz in the late '70s, using carefully organized double-blind testing, did not confirm that a reversal of absolute signal polarity will be subtly audible on music to a 99% confidence limit, as I claimed earlier. Instead, their result was 60 / 113 = 53% correct responses, which then confirms nothing at all if not inaudibility." [Some error by the way.]

2. "Indeed, it (audibility of absolute signal polarity reversal on music) is not one of the few things that can be reliably detected with double-blind testing, as I claimed earlier; in fact there seem to be no known DBTs detecting this at all."

Of course the choice of wording remains entirely yours.

source


Given what we have learned from Atkinson's source I imagine you now rather regret those suggestions?

In any case it seems clear that you should retract your "totally false" charge related to this matter. I won't be so bold as to suggest the wording, the choice should be "entirely yours".

Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.