"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
In rec.audio.tech Peter Wieck wrote:
On Sep 11, 9:12 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message

...



Peter Wieck wrote:

As to the capacitor story, I had two identical amplifiers (AR -
USA),
one with new-and-tested electrolytic replacements on the driver
board
as equivalents to the OEM caps, one with 250V film caps also tested
in
place of the OEM electrolytics (also replaced on the tone board, but
at 'flat' settings they are not relevant). From the OEM-like unit,
the
bass was tubbier... softer if you will, and the treble a little
fuzzy
as compared to the film-cap unit. The film-cap unit sounded much
closer to my Citation 16 amp. My wife could also tell the
difference,
although her description of it would perhaps use different words.
She
preferred the film unit.

Two words: sighted evaluation.

Sighted evaluations are the largest single stimulus to the fabrication
and
justification of audio mythologies that have ever existed.

Inclusion of a "even my wife heard the difference" anecdote always
gives me
a chuckle.

What utter crap. My wife would have no clue which was which,
furthermore her actual interest in audio other than as a moderate user
is about the functional equivalent of my interest in knitting. So she
would have no brief either way.

Well, that's what you think. But in fact people pick up cues
unconsciously.It's why
the most rigorous comparisons are double-blind, for example.

It's quite clear that Peter is still fighting a battle against the very
concept of double blind.