[Hifiearspeakers]

Around here, we make an effort to back up what we say. If you don't want to bother, that's fine. Just keep your subjectivity to yourself where it belongs.

Pot meet kettle. This is rich coming from a guy whose default position is that anyone who comes in here with a claim is surely a charlatan peddling a ruse. That’s not objective either. That’s starting from a point of bias and it kills open dialogue when you force someone into a defensive position from the jump. There is a way to dialogue without coming across like a damn cross examination in court.

 

[bigshot]

Bias towards relying on facts isn't subjective.

When you can't back up what you say, and the evidence piled up in front of you says the exact opposite of what you are claiming, that is the time when you should choose one of two options... 1) shrug your shoulders and move on or 2) do some research to figure out where you went wrong. Getting all butt hurt just makes you look petty and vindictive.

All opinions are NOT created equal. Some opinions are informed and some are ill informed. Evidence is what you use to sort them out, not belligerence. Honestly, I don't know why you keep doing this to yourself. There are dozens of Head-Fi forums where you can share your subjective impressions and have people unquestioningly admire them. This is just the one forum where you can't do that. I think you're in the wrong place.

If you want to shrug your shoulders and move on, please do that. If you want to figure out where you went wrong, do some research and set up your own informal controlled tests.

 

[bigshot]

By the way, I don't have to assume people are charlatans. They usually prove it themselves with their own words.

 

[magicscreen]

Blind testing gives false results.
You hear everything sounding the same.
Only a fool is using blind test to evaluate audio equipment.
Very misguiding procedure. How many people were misguided by that and using a low quality device instead of enjoying a better amp or dac? What a loss.
But I have to admit it is a very clever evil trick to prove that everything sounds the same.

 

[bigshot]

Blind testing gives false results.

Mighty foolish words there. Your bias is stronger than your common sense. Like I say.... they prove it themselves with their words.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

Blind testing gives false results.

Yes, that can be true sometimes, but not because the test is blind. Rather, because blinding alone is not enough, and ignoring the rest of a proper test design can give false results.

By the way, I don't have to assume people are charlatans. They usually prove it themselves with their own words.

For example, claiming to understand proper test design, when they don't. Are you the pot or kettle.... definitely that color.

You hear everything sounding the same.

Not because a test is blind.

 

[castleofargh]

Blind testing gives false results.
You hear everything sounding the same.
Only a fool is using blind test to evaluate audio equipment.
Very misguiding procedure. How many people were misguided by that and using a low quality device instead of enjoying a better amp or dac? What a loss.
But I have to admit it is a very clever evil trick to prove that everything sounds the same.

Now because you're totally not a troll, you're going to explain to us what alternative available to the average audiophile, will demonstrably and consistently offer more accurate results in a listening test. I cannot wait to learn about that method and see evidence of its accuracy.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

Now because you're totally not a troll, you're going to explain to us what alternative available to the average audiophile, will demonstrably and consistently offer more accurate results in a listening test. I cannot wait to learn about that method and see evidence of its accuracy.

If he believes what he is writing and doesn't post here to be intensionally disruptive, then he's not a troll. Being persistently disruptive would make someone a troll. If he wants to civilly and respectfully discuss his beliefs about blind testing on head-fi, this is the right sub-forum... according to the rules, he's not allowed to discuss this outside of Sound Science.

Or did I read the rules wrong?

I'd also like to hear what he believes is better...

 

[bfreedma]

Blind testing gives false results.
You hear everything sounding the same.
Only a fool is using blind test to evaluate audio equipment.
Very misguiding procedure. How many people were misguided by that and using a low quality device instead of enjoying a better amp or dac? What a loss.
But I have to admit it is a very clever evil trick to prove that everything sounds the same.

Please hurry and inform the medical industry of the efficacy failure of blind testing...

We now return to our regularly scheduled show - "How I murdered the scientific method via being really, really sure the Placebo Effect doesn't exist"

 

[KeithPhantom]

Do not feed the troll, this is a waste of time and resources. Just let him prove his point if he can.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

If the goal is to name-call, browbeat and condescend someone into not posting here:
a-good job
b-shame on you.

I doubt your method will convince many people. If you're so burnt out that you don't want to go over this stuff anymore, just ignore it. You realize this is the right place for his post, don't you?

IME, most blind tests for audio that are described in forum posts are set up to either reject the null hypothesis or they fail to reject, e.g. a standard ABX. There's nothing wrong with that, if you understand what it means. When people tout a failure to reject as support for the null hypothesis, that leads to :

But I have to admit it is a very clever evil trick to prove that everything sounds the same.

And let's be honest, many are set up to fail.

If you don't have the patience to engage someone in a way that helps them understand, just don't engage. I'm often impatient, but then I just ignore the posts.

 

[castleofargh]

If he believes what he is writing and doesn't post here to be intensionally disruptive, then he's not a troll. Being persistently disruptive would make someone a troll. If he wants to civilly and respectfully discuss his beliefs about blind testing on head-fi, this is the right sub-forum... according to the rules, he's not allowed to discuss this outside of Sound Science.

Or did I read the rules wrong?

I'd also like to hear what he believes is better...

You're trying to defend the wrong person here IMO. Back in May he even ended up creating a thread to allegedly discuss blind testing in practice. It was some trolling nonsense about a hooligan punching an objectivist. the "story" ended with @magicscreen managing to draw a conclusion that didn't agree with the statistics he had made up for his ad absurdum thought experiment. expert work that got instantly promoted to "deleted thread".

 

[SoundAndMotion]

You're trying to defend the wrong person here IMO.

I'm sorry I was unclear in my posts. I was not defending @magicscreen; I was criticizing the responses to him. I didn't know his history, but it wouldn't change what I wrote. I don't see this as an "us vs. them" topic. i see it as those who understand having an opportunity to help those who don't. And regardless of what @magicscreen writes, many people are skeptical of proper testing, and well reasoned and reasonable responses may help those others.

EDIT: @castleofargh , based on what you wrote, I looked at some of his previous posts. It has lowered my expectations that he’ll have interesting reasons to be skeptical of blind testing. Thanks for the tip. We’ll see if he can manage something response worthy.

 

[bigshot]

Claiming to be able to clearly hear "night and day" differences that are far below the thresholds of human hearing.

If he believes what he is writing and doesn't post here to be intensionally disruptive, then he's not a troll.

Thank you Mr. Dictionary-Definition! What do you call someone who believes what they are saying, but what they are writing is pure cow effluvia? (I added that last word so you could define it for us too!)

Account created two years ago. Only 33 posts, most of them here recently sharing cow effluvia... hmmm...

 

[SoundAndMotion]

I meant you Mr. Pot...
.... and slow too.