John Phillips wrote:

On 2006-01-16, Forwarder wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Fine as an experiment

Dismissed! Ne-ext!


- but nothing whatever to do with the situation
I have sought to address,

What is the situation you are seeking to adress? An audiophool is
claiming to hear this or that sound from a cable.. - "it" is deluded -
the proof of which is this test .. ??


The tests are both OK for their own purposes. However Forwarder's
test determines a sighted majority preference;

You've somewhat simplified the "issue" with your evaluation of my test.
My test actually measures also *consistency* and consensus. If for
instance, 900 people out of 1000 agree that the bass produced by this
amp sounds more powerfull then the bass by the other (there is not
necessarily "preference" here, some would like strong bass, others may
not), and if these amps (which they will, since all amps sound identical
in an ABX) sound identical in an ABX then there must be a conclusion to
be drawn about the validity of ABX here.

while Don's determines
an individual ability to detect a difference.

Yes, thank you, Don's test puts the *testee*, the *subject* the *victim*
to the test, in the end. It is also a test for the subject to (not) see
(but hear) past the stressfull situation.

Some take it as a given that the shine on an exotic cable is enough to
distort the perceptions of people but do not accept that a "which is
which, tell me bitch!" situation is not... Really!

These are completely
different matters and not at all equivalent, so you can't substitute
one test for the other and expect the same answer.

My test tests the tests.. That is, it tries to answer the question
whether or not ABX/DBT is applicable to the phenomenon of
"audiophoolery" ...