Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man
I am sorry, but that is nonsense. Blind tests that are positive show an audible difference but blind tests that are negative do not show an inaudible difference?!
I went a little too fast. A failed ABX test proves the person being tested did not hear a difference at that particular time, in that particular setting (if they were of good faith). But it doesn't prove that there isn't a difference to be heard. Someone else might hear it. While some people have proven to be able to ABX 320kbps MP3s with so-called "killer" samples, I'm not sure I would succeed as well, because I have very little training, and don't know what to listen for. My failing the test wouldn't prove much, while their success would undeniably prove there is an audible difference.
In other words: a successful ABX test proves someone
) can hear a difference, while a failed ABX test does NOT prove no-one
can hear a difference. Does that satisfy you?
Edit: my failing a test, while not proving that there isn't, generally speaking, an audible difference, would be valuable information to me
, as far as spending money in equipment or choosing a bitrate for lossy encoding go, for instance. And since I'm a pretty normal guy, with normal hearing, basic training and arguably decent gear, I choose to take into account ABX results from other normal people with normal hearing, basic training and decent gear, because I can't just buy everything, see for myself, and return everything I've bought that didn't result in a positive outcome.Edited by skamp - 3/16/12 at 10:20am