BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ailevin" data-source="post: 3623825" data-attributes="member: 140149">This thread reminds me of audio forums where discussions of A/B blind or even double blind tests are banned except in very limited discussion areas.  The typical scenario is that someone or some group is certain of the improvement in sound that they get when using particular cables or power cords.  Then there is a meet up with some sort of blind testing and these preferences turn out to be exceeding difficult to demonstrate beyond randomness.  This leads to an endless discussion of how the listening environment is not exactly the same as at home and on and on.  I actually participated in something like this having to do with my ability and the ability of others to detect differences in fidelity due to sampling rate.  I was certain I could hear the difference until I did the detailed controlled tested where I had no idea what sampling rates were being used. It was music of my choice, and I could listen to any passage I liked again and again, but I never knew what the sampling rate would be and I had  to choose A or B.  Kind of like the optometrist with the "better or worse" business.The moral of the story or basis of the policy for banning discussion of A/B comparison is that the empirical data does not seem to inform the subjective experience.  If the gold cables sound give you greater joy, then buy them.  I still over-sample though my hearing is declining. There is no use debating someone else's first person experience. This is particularly true when debating specifications vs. experience with high end optics or sound equipment.Alan</blockquote>

Verification