WHY IS THERE SO MUCH HATE FOR THE HIGH END GEAR ON AUDIO GEAR?

Anybody knowing how to design a room know that seeing the room as we want it done so beautiful it is ,will not improve acoustic...😊

I am not in a contest where the look of a beautiful piece of gear can influence the impression some people ask me to write in front of a veil masking the gear ...

I just returned a piece of gear supposed to be better costlier and more beautiful than my vintage not so beautiful amplifier... i paid it the same price than all my system and i loose 300 bucks returning it ... I returned the upgrade because all acoustic factors were worst save the electrical noise floor which was better with a tremendous power supply ( synergy problem probably ) Did i needed a double blind test to mask the more advanced new technology piece and the more beautiful and the costlier one or the opposite ? No ...😊 I was biased in favor of this upgrade though ...I decided listening few minutes for my vintage piece ... I trusted my ears ...

What has a meaning statistically as a useful tool  is preposterous when applied for one person system optimization especially when this optimization process is incremental in a very well known specific environment ...I used informal blind test for sure in my system optimization as a tool not as a debunking practice circus ...

You think like an ideologue who sell a salad with a hidden goal ... Throwing a gauntlet to all people here with a statistical tool ( blind test) which you used as a debunking tool is propaganda ...

James Randi acted the same to prove that no " miracles" exist... The poor dude never looked too hard...there is even books written about hundred miracles right now no science can explain ...

Nothing is more easy than to exhibit "miracles" around the world...

Some are not provable but many are proved even by science ...James Randi at least was a showman not only an ideologist ...

The same materialism and transhumanist today debunk the "existence of free will " ... Without even realizing the complete contradiction implied by the free will intention of doing such debunking of the free will existence ... Sam Harris did not know better , he conflate free will thinking with free choices and no choice ... What a deep thinker indeed ...😊

Some are more gullible than me ...

Is it your ears you trust or your eyes?

Actually Toole and Olive essentially did exactly the same test using speakers. And they published the entire experiment in the peer reviewed AESJ. This is a very common method used in many clinical studies. So is that a sad commentary on how science does research on human perception?

Did you hit your head recently? The procedure I mentioned was done in an appropriate way whereas the one I addressed was not. That, and Barton was part of the team you mentioned, which may explain your misunderstanding. 

All the best,
Nonoise

@JacobsDad

Since this has become a toilet thread, I think your trigger of audio asylum days is technically referred to as a "flushback." 

rational thinkers , scientists and logicians know that design of experiments is difficult at best with large groups of subjects…. science is messy and unsettled… Barton who i admire certainty voiced some frustration ( with the D in DOE )…. 

For example, i would never setup a group test with a large panel radiator… even the 100% measure crowd should be able to figure out WHY… and anyone who has owned panels will know why as well.  Of course a point source is better but still flawed because a wide “ sweet spot” is lossy… Go ahead, use math… 

ignore the blowhard know it all…. focus instead on those actually seeking to improve the complex ear / brain DOE 

Peter a genius might have really been on to something with a panel that emulated… a point source…. RIP good man