[audioengr]

Originally Posted by Sovkiller

Is curious on how always someone try to boost "a myth", or try to prove something, that is used as an excuse for something for years, there is always a "but", and all what we hear is that the methodology used was flawed because of this and that. The same happened with the cables and the test Edwood conducted a couple of years ago, nobody accepted the results as according to them the methodology was "flawed"... My concern is why not trying to find what they did right, and accept the results, instead??? Any methodology will have limitations and will be flawed, AFAIK...There is absolutely no way of considering all scenarios while conducting a given test, while I agree that ones are better than others...

Why not trying to prove the opposite that will be far easier as logic indicates, if this is so hard to prove instead, via a flawless methodology if you can find any??? Why not then implementing one yourselves with a better approach, and try to prove the opposite???....Food for thought...

The result of 500nsec jitter being audible to only 25% of listeners is not consistent with my experience. That's why. Even at CES, under those contrived conditions I get 100%.

Steve N.