[stevenkelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Duderino /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...

I think you miss the point, that is:
Quote:

Done properly, single-blind testing is JUST as scientifically valid as double-blind testing.

You're point regards the risk of SBT not being done properly, which is not in question. Done properly, the results would be identical, clearly.

You obviously need to define Done Properly, but that's easy. It means Done in a way that would give the same results as a DBT.

So you got all excited over a 7 YO thread for nothing, just a mis-understanding.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Wooow, why the hell can't anybody at least resurrect a dead thread properly and do it on a Sunday?

 

[Mr_Junesequa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenkelby /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you miss the point, that is: You're point regards the risk of SBT not being done properly, which is not in question. Done properly, the results would be identical, clearly. You obviously need to define Done Properly, but that's easy. It means Done in a way that would give the same results as a DBT. So you got all excited over a 7 YO thread for nothing, just a mis-understanding.

here here -

+ I always wonder what the original posters of these ancient threads would think if they came back and read them years later...i resurrected a thread about the 1g ipod and whether it was going to 'make it' as a player! that was a funny one!

 

[El Duderino]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenkelby /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you miss the point, that is: Done properly, single-blind testing is JUST as scientifically valid as double-blind testing. You're point regards the risk of SBT not being done properly, which is not in question. Done properly, the results would be identical, clearly. You obviously need to define Done Properly, but that's easy. It means Done in a way that would give the same results as a DBT. So you got all excited over a 7 YO thread for nothing, just a mis-understanding.

Ha, I didn't even realize the thread was 7 years old when I responded. Apologies.

As far as your reply, "done properly" or not and whether or not a SBT produces the same results as a DBT is completely besides the point. Even if the results produced are identical eg 487 out of 500 people can perceive a difference, etc. in the SBT study, the methods used to obtain those results cannot SCIENTIFICALLY be considered anywhere near as valid as a DBT.

Consider this: pharmaceutical companies spend 100s of millions of dollars on multicenter, placebo-controlled double-blind studies to prove definitively that a drug is producing the same effect as they showed years previously in an initial proof-of-concept smaller, scale single-blind study. Why go to this additional expense if both the SBT and the DBT are equivalent? Simple answer: they're not equivalent and proving something using double-blind protocols is always considered more valid regardless of what results are obtained and how they compare to a well-designed single-blind study.

El Duderino

 

[El Duderino]

I forgot to mention that, as stated earlier, I unintentionally broke a forum rule by discussing DBT. I will refrain from carrying on with this discussion but would be happy to continue this in the "Science" sub-forum or by PM. Thanks.

El Duderino

 

[stevenkelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Duderino /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...

Fair enough, but I do understand what you mean, and my point is true, it's just a question of definitions and semantics that we're stuck on

I know what you're trying to say though

I'd like to talk more by PM too, but have no time to answer quickly!

Steve

 

[Caution]

Holy crap don't people read the date stamps on posts?

 

[krmathis]

They sure do...
Without interconnects = no sound.
With interconnects = sound.

The quality (material, build, design, ...) make a difference as well. Imo that is.

 

[jenneth]

Sure, they make a difference, especially when you go from a low-fi cable to mid/hi-fi cable. Much of the debates we see here occur when people start talking about the benefit going from hi-fi to super hi-fi.

 

[Zombie_X]

I think interconnects make a diifference if you get into better materials.

I really haven't bought many as I mainly make my own. But I can say that my silver cables sound tons better than any copper cables.

 

[yappering]

Ok well I am using a cheapo $5 radioshack mini to mini interconnect for my CD player line out to my amplifier. I wonder does it make a difference? There are just so many choices out there. Oh and where is a good place to buy an interconnect?

 

[LeftyGorilla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wooow, why the hell can't anybody at least resurrect a dead thread properly and do it on a Sunday?

Indeed.

 

[ChroniCali]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftyGorilla /img/forum/go_quote.gif Indeed.

Well it was resurrected on a Saturday this time... kind of close enough.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wooow, why the hell can't anybody at least resurrect a dead thread properly and do it on a Sunday?

Exactly what happened now...
'yappering' resurrected it on Sunday March 15th.

 

[LeftyGorilla]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yappering /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ok well I am using a cheapo $5 radioshack mini to mini interconnect for my CD player line out to my amplifier. I wonder does it make a difference? There are just so many choices out there. Oh and where is a good place to buy an interconnect?

Well, then, someone should be decent enough to answer the question, since it is Sunday.

1) Your $5 radioshack mini is totally fine.
2) When you decide to upgrade, just pick how much you want to spend and you will be able to find a cable at that price-point. Best place to buy is here, post a message in the Cables For Sale describing what you want and how much you want to spend. Some nice Head-Fier will make one for you or sell you one.
3) does it make a difference? See, please: Nick Charles' Cable Test and Gigantic Pissing Contest Cable Thread

Enjoy!