"Eeyore"
wrote
in message
Arny Krueger wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com

I have done the same and I have discussed it wih people
who actually do hearing reearch for a living. The common
opinion I get from actual research scientists in the
field of human hearing are pretty much the same. If it
aint peer reviewed it's junk as frar as science is
concered and it is highly unlikely that audio jounalists
or audiophiles would be able to do tests that would
stand up to peer review.

I don't think you understand the problem, Scott. It is
not about audio journalists and audiophiles doing tests
that would stand up to peer review, it is about audio
journalists and audiophiles doing tests stand up to the
cold light of day. Without a typical audiophile's
suspended disbelief, most of the alleged listening
evaluations and opinions published in high end magazines
and web sites are well beyond the pale.

I had an interesting chat with a guy who's into high-end
audio last night.

We've had some of those in the SMWTMS club over the years.

One of our newer members is the founder of DCM.

http://www.dcmspeakers.com/heritage.htm

You'd be amused to hear how they 'persuade' ppl to buy
kit !

Pehaps, but remember I used to be in the biz. I'm sure some new, amusing
tricks have been developed since.