Ethernet Cables, do they make a difference?

I think you are confused.

If you state that you can jump 10’ straight up from a standstill and either I bring a 10’ high bar or we use your 10’ high bar.

What are we exactly testing, why isn’t the 10’ high bar valid, and why do we need 49 other people to attempt to jump over a 10’ high bar?

Behold everyone where simple questions somehow can't be answered. 

jinjuku194 posts04-26-2018 12:10pm

I think you are confused.

If you state that you can jump 10’ straight up from a standstill and either I bring a 10’ high bar or we use your 10’ high bar.

What are we exactly testing, why isn’t the 10’ high bar valid, and why do we need 49 other people to attempt to jump over a 10’ high bar?

Behold everyone where simple questions somehow can't be answered

There is a mountain of information about how to conduct scientifically valid listening tests, going back at least as far as Munson’s presentations to the AES in the late ’50s. (Yes, that Munson, the guy from Bell Labs who worked with Fletcher.) It's been followed by other work by Floyd Toole, Harman and many others. If you're serious about valid listening tests - and I suspect you aren't - you'll want to review some of their work. It will reveal that this matter is nowhere near as simple as you suggest. If you're not serious, or if you have some ulterior motives, you'll just continue arguing here with your nonsense.

Your latest argument here includes the logical fallacy of the excluded middle, so you might want to learn a bit about logic and reason, too.

LOL. Simple questions can’t be answered.

I have the sighted subjectivist crowd DEMANDING scientifically rigorous testing. Oh this is a hoot.

If you can find a single post where I was maintaining that this was supposed to be AES worthy let me know. I'm simply out to test an individuals claim. Nothing less or more.

Also let me know of ANY AES papers that have accepted sighted evaluation.

Q You say AES doesn’t accept sighted tests. Do they even care one way or the Other? Are there AES Papers accepting or defining blind tests? Or anything related to blind tests? I’d be curious to know and surprised if there are, even though I know the dude from Harmon Kardon who’s high on blind tests is or was the head of AES. I have the impression and I could be wrong that AES is a little bit too conservative to believe in Cable differences or wire directionality or fancy fuses or controversial tweaks. So why would they support or accept blind tests? It doesn’t make sense.

jinjuku

I have the sighted subjectivist crowd DEMANDING scientifically rigorous testing.

Not so. I’ve simply pointed out that what you claim is a scientifically valid test is nothing of the sort.

If you can find a single post where I was maintaining that this was supposed to be AES worth let me know.

You’ve claimed your protocol is valid, scientific. It isn’t. That’s the simple answer to your fuzzy simple question.

Personally, I don't have much use for double-blind listening tests ... although I have a mild general interest in them.