On Nov 4, 6:52 am, Patrick Turner wrote:

Musicians do not necessarily have any special hearing abilities.

Yes, they do: they have trained perception. They listen consciously.
Non-audiophiles from the general population cannot even hear the
difference between a boombox played through good speakers and a Class
A PP tube amp played through the same speakers. To them it is all
"nice", useless for tests.

If I could find enough experienced audiophiles -- defined as having
trained their own aural perception -- available on a regular basis, I
would use them instead. it was just easier in my particular
circumstances to find as many classical musicians as required.

It should also be observed that most audiophiles talk big about their
golden ears but in blind tests have poor discrimination, so that you
first require tests to sort out the good listeners. That shocked me;
for a while I wondered if the meterheads weren't right, if vanishing
THD numbers aren't the holy grail after all... But you don't want to
hear about the anguish of an open mind.

For the innocent: The point of listening tests isn't to discover which
amp or topology is "better": I already know from comparison with years
in the concert halls which kinds of amps and which topologies I prefer
(Class A1 triodes or trioded pentodes in PP with ESL, and ditto in SET
with horns). The point of tests is to determine why these topologies
affect the emotions differently; psycho-acoustics is probably the last
frontier in audio-electronics.

Andre Jute
"I was at a board meeting for the LA Chapter of the Audio Engineering
Society last night on XM Satellite radio audio and data transmission.
Sadly, we missed you there, and at the SMPTE and Acoustical Society
recent meetings as well. Everyone was asking, 'Where is that wonderful
Andre Jute? The world just doesn't rotate without him...'" -- John
Mayberry, Emmaco