prof
I love the sound of my CJ tube amplification and always go back to it after trying solid state. Never done a "blind test." Even when some "objectivists" think tube amps are silly. I swoon over the sound of my "crazy expensive" (to the average joe), cartridge etc. No talk of blind testing, all subjective.
>>>>Gosh, don’t go out on a limb or anything.
prof
I ALSO am aware of the general features of, and rational for, the scientific empirical method. And I can’t just pretend that audio is magically excepted from the complexities that bedevil any other careful empirical inquiry - especially the unreliability built in to human subjectivity.(And this is something the "blind test naysayers" seem to routinely misunderstand: accepting that human subjectivity is unreliable doesn’t mean "a subjective impression is wrong and due to bias" or "what you think you heard wasn’t real." It only means that in many cases it *could* be error, so it can be hard to unravel the objective facts from the subjective impressions).
>>>>Oh, geez, just when you were doing so well. Blind tests don’t mean anything. You were on the right track with complexities, but then you went off the rails with your usual bind test hornswoggle. It’s the inability of humans to control all the physical variables. Or know all the variables, for that matter. It has virtually nothing to do with psychological issues. No, it’s not hard to unravel the objective facts from the subjective hornswoggle.
I love the sound of my CJ tube amplification and always go back to it after trying solid state. Never done a "blind test." Even when some "objectivists" think tube amps are silly. I swoon over the sound of my "crazy expensive" (to the average joe), cartridge etc. No talk of blind testing, all subjective.
>>>>Gosh, don’t go out on a limb or anything.
prof
I ALSO am aware of the general features of, and rational for, the scientific empirical method. And I can’t just pretend that audio is magically excepted from the complexities that bedevil any other careful empirical inquiry - especially the unreliability built in to human subjectivity.(And this is something the "blind test naysayers" seem to routinely misunderstand: accepting that human subjectivity is unreliable doesn’t mean "a subjective impression is wrong and due to bias" or "what you think you heard wasn’t real." It only means that in many cases it *could* be error, so it can be hard to unravel the objective facts from the subjective impressions).
>>>>Oh, geez, just when you were doing so well. Blind tests don’t mean anything. You were on the right track with complexities, but then you went off the rails with your usual bind test hornswoggle. It’s the inability of humans to control all the physical variables. Or know all the variables, for that matter. It has virtually nothing to do with psychological issues. No, it’s not hard to unravel the objective facts from the subjective hornswoggle.