Advertisement



  1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

How do the 'non-subjectivists' choose their hi-fi systems?

Discussion in 'audio' started by Pete L, Apr 25, 2020.

  1. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    Your post quoted one of mine, so I assume this comment was directed at me. I was, I confess, a bit taken aback at your 'pot/kettle/black' comment, so I've gone back and reviewed every post I made in this thread. With the exception, perhaps, of a comment or two in the last couple of pages, I completely refute your comment. And even where there has been an element of snark in mine (I'm only human) that has always, always been in response to snark (or worse) from the person I'm responding to.

    For the most part, I've tried patiently to a) understand the other side's point (and seek clarification where I had trouble with that) and b) make my own viewpoint as clear as I could, in a non-inflammatory way. I regret that the other side has not always returned the favour. I'm also entirely confident that adamdea's snarky comments in the last couple of pages (about my lack of self-awareness mostly) are without foundation on the basis of this thread and are therefore mostly passive-aggressive, ad-hom thread-crapping.
    I don't think I did any of this, so I assume that this part of your 'rant' (your term ;)) wasn't directed at me personally, so I won't take it that way, nor will I respond. If you did intend it to apply to my posts, then I'd appreciate knowing which ones.
     
  2. ClothEarsAndy

    ClothEarsAndy pfm Member

    This wasn't particularly aimed at you and was more of a general comment about the state of this thread, but I did find a couple of your earlier comments about blind testing condescending. I do know a fair bit about validation and the statistics behind it and even though the blind testing aspect of it is a fairly minor part, I'd still say that I have more experience than most people on this thread.

    Then again I could be totally wrong if you take everybody's comments at face value. In which case we've probably found the highest online density of Pharma validation engineers in the world .

    There's others who were/are far more condescending, again on both sides.

    The bit about science wasn't aimed at you at all. Just some of the general Luddite comments that have surfaced about mistrust of scientists.
     
  3. DimitryZ

    DimitryZ pfm Member

    As an engineer, I thought it clever to make my own mains cable, using in-wall wire and nice plugs, thinking along the lines you pointed out - the last meter and all that. They sounded dreadful.

    As for actual topic of discussion, I pointed out serious technical flaws with DBTs as they are commonly executed. Others have done as well over the years. As an aerospace engineer with 35 years of experience and lots of lab time, I know these to be serious issues with test setup, statistical errors and inherent assumptions.

    My objective friends response was slow motion hand waving and eye rolling. My conclusion is that perhaps DBT methodology was initially developed as a flawed but necessary way to test items universally recognized to have large sound differences - i.e. transducers.

    Today, it devovled into an amateurish field designed to crudely demonstrate to audiophiles that they live in an imaginary world. A gaslighting cudgel to use in Internet fights with no actual value to anyone.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2020
  4. DimitryZ

    DimitryZ pfm Member

    Here are some more things to think about if we claim methodological soundness of DBT test protocols:

    http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=5265

    This classic paper remains largely unanswered to this day, other than by vitriolic attacks on its author.

    https://hal-institut-mines-telecom....ile/index/docid/842647/filename/APAC_5172.pdf

    Here, researchers show that the standard ABX protocol is the LEAST discriminating among the three they studied.


    I expect that my objective friends will deny any problems and continue to maintain the infallibility of their chosen deity.
     
    Ciunas Audio likes this.

Share This Page





Advertisement


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice