Re: Death to ABXers! Read Testament Here!

On May 4, 12:00=A0pm, "Soundhaspriority" <nowh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "ScottW" <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:fcecf7b2-33cf-4de7-b04d-3ce278c792a9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 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!
>
> =A0 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 =A0repeat 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
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-=AD------------------
> 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.

No it doesn't.  Just deal with it.  Do an A-X comparison.  Then do a B
listen to wipe A before a B-X, then an A listen to clear B before
repeating A-X.

Of course you could just buy a boom box and wait for sufficient
acclimation to it to be happy.

> 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
shar=
ed
> human experience.

 Except the reason you reject ABX exists even greater in subjective
human experience as well as the bias the tests try to avoid.

> The ABXers have repeatedly claimed that they live in a
> brick(****) house, while doubters live in a straw house.

 Subjective BS comment that prevents dialogue.

> 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
observation=
s
> of the boutique subjectivists are right. Crazy yells louder than sane on
> both sides.

 Exactly.   My beef with reviewers is simple.  Their bias extends well
beyond sighted influence to advertising dollar influence.   The BS
gets exponentially thicker and deeper when the corruption of money is
involved.
>
> 2. Yes, break-in is largely a human factor.

I did have a break-in experience with my Orions.  After initially
setting the ASP and running for few hours, upon retest I found a
slight ****ft in one channel. Actually brought the tweeter pot setting
to be closer to other channel after "breakin".  I also see a very
slight gain change on the amp as it heats up but it is quite
consistent.

ScottW