On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:34:11 -0000, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
OK, I've had a bit of a think - and I've written a protocol, which I
believe would be a basis of fair testing of audio components to
resolve such issues as cable sound etc.

I invite all here to read what I suggest, and let me know if I have
either missed something, or am being unfair on one direction or
another.

http://www.donepearce.plus.com/odds/dbt/

I think this could be a way of defusing the vituperation that
currently surrounds the subject.

So what do you think?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don,

I think the protocol is sound, as a protocol, but in practice, I think that
doing the tests would be a very lengthy process, and whether anyone can
reasonably maintain concentration for that length of time is questionable. I
also would prefer to see an ABX regime, which obviously a coin-toss won't
allow.

It would be better, I feel, if there was a box that changed the cables (gold
plated relays or whatever) in a random ABX manner, keeping a record of what
change was made. In this way, the subject can make as many changes as often
as they want, and make either quick changes or listen for longer periods
before having to make a decision. It should not be too difficult to write a
program to make the switching and to record what switch was in effect at
what time. A standard PC GPI/O card can be used to drive the relays.

S.



The problem with the switch box is that it gives the believers their
necessary get-out clause. They will simply say that the box changed
the sound of the cables.

As for taking too long, a lazy Sunday afternoon should see this taken
care of.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com