There you go again, making a claim based on your misuderstanding of statistics and your misinterpretation of results. This appears to be a continuation of your misinterpretation of the M&M study where you claim it proved some could hear a difference in normal listening environments, despite the flaws in your observations being clearly pointed out to you. I have yet to see one credible test where all other factors apart from 16/44 are controlled that supports your assertion of exceptions or even more absurd, that that they "fail so much of the time". Still flogging the dead horse? I like Emotiva products but peddling FUD on a sound science forum does you or your company you represent no favours.