|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: No, I'm not making that up (long) posted by Jim Austin on October 21, 2005 at 06:49:03:
> Mathematically, there's nothing wrong with DBTs...the problem isn't with the test itself; it's with people taking the test and with the difficulty of the task. These tests are just too hard for us. Listening to music--heck, listening to anything--is a deep, emotionally resonant experience. It's very hard--it requires Zen-like mental control, which I lack--to reduce it to a scientific exercise. And that's precisely what's required to consistently recognize--consciously--very small differences in sensory perception and to prove it via double-blind tests...I do, indeed, regret the fact--and I believe it IS a fact--that though they might work in particular, narrow circumstances, *DBT's are very rarely efficacious for audio testing and evaluation*. There's nothing wrong with the concept; it's their application to subtle sensory (and emotional) phenomena that I question, and that many others before me have questioned.>You got it. And the recent Stereophile editorials about audio DBTs being more of a test for the listening training, experience and acuity of the listener rather than of actual audible differences between components rings very true. Unlike DBTs in new drug trials (what the test was originally designed for), audio DBT results CHANGE with the experience of the test taker/listener. While they may have some use in psychometry, they are pretty worthless for the audio hobbyist.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Very well put.... - mkuller 10/21/0509:31:39 10/21/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
