Wait a minute. Those who rely on measurements alone as the final word on anything are now saying that should a fuse change show a difference in a measurement, that the difference can't be solely attributed to the fuse?
That the difference can not be determined to be enough to be heard?
That the difference has to be of a large enough nature to be valid?
That the difference cannot be determined to be better?
The test cited showed a difference in what could be heard. It was small but it could be heard. It could be determined to be better since that difference has to be folded back into the file to be appreciated.
The sum is greater than the parts.
It shows a distinct difference, no matter the size. That is what is important. Anyone could reasonably come to the conclusion that having more info would be an improvement. There are now more clues to enhance the performance.
There were too many sophistic caveats weaved into that argument, which would come handy in a kangaroo court setting, but not in audio, where incremental improvements are the norm, and to be expected.
All the best,
Nonoise
That the difference can not be determined to be enough to be heard?
That the difference has to be of a large enough nature to be valid?
That the difference cannot be determined to be better?
The test cited showed a difference in what could be heard. It was small but it could be heard. It could be determined to be better since that difference has to be folded back into the file to be appreciated.
The sum is greater than the parts.
It shows a distinct difference, no matter the size. That is what is important. Anyone could reasonably come to the conclusion that having more info would be an improvement. There are now more clues to enhance the performance.
There were too many sophistic caveats weaved into that argument, which would come handy in a kangaroo court setting, but not in audio, where incremental improvements are the norm, and to be expected.
All the best,
Nonoise