Re: Death to ABXers! Read Testament Here!

"ScottW" <ScottW48@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:fcecf7b2-33cf-4de7-b04d-3ce278c792a9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 May 4, 7:53 am, "Soundhaspriority" <nowh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I picked this up on rec.audio.pro. Thank Heavens the ABXers will Burn in
> Hell in Torment Everlasting!

  Except no one ever said you have to listen to A then B then X.
In fact one should listen A - X then B - X  repeat as many times a you
think is required to decide....if you can.

However your reference does indicate how break-in is largely a human
factor and not an equipment factor.

ScottW
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You made two points.

1. The problem which Robert Adams discovered is that the trials are not 
independent. This throws all statistics out the window. There is no way to

deal with trials correlated in an unmodeled fa****on. I have long been 
concerned with the apparent contradiction of ABX findings with widely
shared 
human experience. The ABXers have repeatedly claimed that they live in a 
brick(****) house, while doubters live in a straw house. Adams's
observation 
makes things much more balanced.

The argument is dominated by reactionaries. Although I now think that the 
ABXers are probably provably wrong, that doesn't mean that the
observations 
of the boutique subjectivists are right. Crazy yells louder than sane on 
both sides.

2. Yes, break-in is largely a human factor.