On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 10:08:27 +0000, Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , Malcolm
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 20:26:50 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 09:27:48 -0600, Malcolm
wrote:

At the end of the day there's a simple answer. If you really can
hear these differences you claim then you should be able to
demonstrate them reliably to others in proper tests. But of course
no one ever can.

No great point in that - given the fundamental flaws in such
"tests". Which of course is why they never produce any meaningful
results.

They do when there's meaningful differences :-)

Very true! There's absolutely no problem when such tests show a
reliable reproducible difference between A and B. One can then have a
certain amount of confidence that A and B do indeed differ.

The problem is that many (most?) such tests fail to reliably
distinguish between A and B. One cannot, in that case, say that A and B
are the same. That's a logical fallacy.

Indeed. That is why the conclusion would not be that they are "the
same". Only that the evidence from the test indicated them to be audibly
indistinguishable when compared.


Absolutely correct - as long as you add the rider that they are
audibly indistinguishable under the conditions of said test -
whatever they may be.

However if they have different brand names, cost different amounts, etc,
they clearly are not "the same" so far as a potential user/buyer are
concerned. A listening comparison test isn't intended to deal with those
points, nor to see if they are "the same". Just to give evidence to
indicate if there are any audible differences which might affect a
choice.


Correct.

So the "flaw" seems to be that you wish to draw inappropriate
conclusions from a test intended for another purpose. This isn't a
"flaw" in the test, but in your inappropriate use of the results. The
"logical fallacy" is in the way you present an inappropriate conclusion
and bypass the appropriate one. :-)


No, it doesn't matter what the purpose of the test is - the results
(such as they are) stand. The only only "logical fallacy" I'm referring
to is that those that say that a test that fails to find a difference
between A and B "proves" that A and B are identical.


If someone perfers one brand name to another, or wants to buy expensive
kit to show off or feel good, or have neat looking gear, that is nothing
to do with such a test.


Absolutely correct.

However, if we test and compare two items or systems and find that the
listeners can't distinguish the sound using one from using the other,
then we have evidence that they need not take assumptions that they
"sound different" seriously when commenting on the items or systems.
*Unless* some other appropriately run test shows other results in the
form of evidence that can be assessed.

Thus if the above is the "fundamental flaw" you were referring to, then
I am afraid it is in your understanding, not in the tests. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

If listeners in a "test" situation cannot distinguish the sound between
one system and another then one cannot assume that those same listeners
in another situation (for the sake of argument a "home" situation) would
also not be able to distinguish between the systems.

The problem, of course, is that when said listeners claim such
differences, some "scientists" say that that is nonsense and that if
they (the listeners) hear such differences at home, then they must
surely be able to hear the same differences under test/laboratory
conditions.

Since the two situations are fundamentally different and that what is
being "measured" is one aspect of human perception there is a bit of a
problem in asserting that the "home" vis-a-vis the "laboratory"
situation will have no affect on the perception itself.

Personally, I think that if a "well" (and there are very few of those)
conducted listening test fails to show a difference between two systems/
components, then the differences (if any) are probably not worth worrying
too much about. However, I see no problem whatsoever in anyone conducting
their own home listening tests and deciding on the basis of those tests
that one item is better than the other. It is the height of arrogance for
anyone to claim that they are "wrong".

Regards

Malcolm