glupson
geoffkait,
I do not think I am overthinking it. In fact, I barely give it a thought. My question is due to the repeated statements including "empirical testing" that nobody questioned. It became the basic postulate while, to my current understanding that I am eager to expand if someone gives me an explanation, it is just three words meant to make it seem legitimate and serious. Both sides accepted it while they might have not needed it. That part is relevant to the debate of this thread. My real personal intention is to learn more about the matter that involves "empirical testing lab" so I can be aware of different approaches with no sway to either of the two sides of this thread (that battle is lost for both, in my belief). Just claiming that something is "empirical" is not that hard to come up with. Of course it is. What else would it be? Now, think about using the word "lab" there. That is a pretty heavy stuff. It is a nightmare to set up a lab. And here, I saw it thrown around as if it is my living room which was not that complicated to set up. But using "lab" and "empirical" in one sentence insinuates something really strong. At the same time, it implies the existence of a "theoretical testing lab" which is my interest as I have never ran across one. I gave up on figuring out if tuning works, if people walk or talk, but am hoping to learn something here.
>>>>>>>Methinks you’re getting hung up on words, on semantics. Empirical, testing and lab mean different things to different people. Test system, test protocol, test plan, test evaluation, test results - those terms mean different things to different people. Nobody ever agrees what constitutes a “scientific” test or a proper after the testing has been finished. It all has to be agreed a priori to have any meaning or validity. You seem to be under the impression this is some sort of peer review forum.
Theoretical testing lab? Huh? What do you think this is, Los Alamos? NIST? Harvard? A theoretical testing lab can be anyone’s listening room. Or someone’s basement. Hel-loo?
All that aside, as I’ve cautioned before a single audio test has no meaning if the test results are negative, no matter how careful and thorough the test may have been.
Pop quiz: which freezes faster, cold water or warm water?
geoffkait,
I do not think I am overthinking it. In fact, I barely give it a thought. My question is due to the repeated statements including "empirical testing" that nobody questioned. It became the basic postulate while, to my current understanding that I am eager to expand if someone gives me an explanation, it is just three words meant to make it seem legitimate and serious. Both sides accepted it while they might have not needed it. That part is relevant to the debate of this thread. My real personal intention is to learn more about the matter that involves "empirical testing lab" so I can be aware of different approaches with no sway to either of the two sides of this thread (that battle is lost for both, in my belief). Just claiming that something is "empirical" is not that hard to come up with. Of course it is. What else would it be? Now, think about using the word "lab" there. That is a pretty heavy stuff. It is a nightmare to set up a lab. And here, I saw it thrown around as if it is my living room which was not that complicated to set up. But using "lab" and "empirical" in one sentence insinuates something really strong. At the same time, it implies the existence of a "theoretical testing lab" which is my interest as I have never ran across one. I gave up on figuring out if tuning works, if people walk or talk, but am hoping to learn something here.
>>>>>>>Methinks you’re getting hung up on words, on semantics. Empirical, testing and lab mean different things to different people. Test system, test protocol, test plan, test evaluation, test results - those terms mean different things to different people. Nobody ever agrees what constitutes a “scientific” test or a proper after the testing has been finished. It all has to be agreed a priori to have any meaning or validity. You seem to be under the impression this is some sort of peer review forum.
Theoretical testing lab? Huh? What do you think this is, Los Alamos? NIST? Harvard? A theoretical testing lab can be anyone’s listening room. Or someone’s basement. Hel-loo?
All that aside, as I’ve cautioned before a single audio test has no meaning if the test results are negative, no matter how careful and thorough the test may have been.
Pop quiz: which freezes faster, cold water or warm water?