Its incorrect because its wrong. Your whole premise is false. Its not anyone's responsibility to explain to you why they hear something. Maybe its nothing more than they have learned to hear something you have not. Did you ever think of that?
Not that it matters. Again, no one owes you any explanation. Not only wires, I can tell the difference between lots of things- wire on the floor vs elevated, wire going one way vs another, warmed up vs cold, on springs vs cones, on and on. And on.
But anyway, I can tell you why nobody replies. It was clear to me in the first 6 words: "I have performed double-blind tests". Because here's the thing. And I know this is hard to believe but think about it a minute you just might get it. When the difference between two things is so readily apparent you hear it immediately, why would you then put yourself through all the incredible time and effort to perform even one double-blind test? To prove to yourself what you yourself already know you heard? Why?
You know the answer: you only do the test when you can't hear any difference in the first place.
That is why double-blind testing is so illogical. They ones who can hear will never do it. And the ones who can't never will hear a difference anyway. All double-blind testing can do is activate another audio canard, the expectation bias.
I really do hope that one day you somehow develop listening skills and are able to hear differences between things like this. Seriously. I do. But until then, and for as long as you stay on this unproductive course: You go, girl!
Not that it matters. Again, no one owes you any explanation. Not only wires, I can tell the difference between lots of things- wire on the floor vs elevated, wire going one way vs another, warmed up vs cold, on springs vs cones, on and on. And on.
But anyway, I can tell you why nobody replies. It was clear to me in the first 6 words: "I have performed double-blind tests". Because here's the thing. And I know this is hard to believe but think about it a minute you just might get it. When the difference between two things is so readily apparent you hear it immediately, why would you then put yourself through all the incredible time and effort to perform even one double-blind test? To prove to yourself what you yourself already know you heard? Why?
You know the answer: you only do the test when you can't hear any difference in the first place.
That is why double-blind testing is so illogical. They ones who can hear will never do it. And the ones who can't never will hear a difference anyway. All double-blind testing can do is activate another audio canard, the expectation bias.
I really do hope that one day you somehow develop listening skills and are able to hear differences between things like this. Seriously. I do. But until then, and for as long as you stay on this unproductive course: You go, girl!