Have we lost civility and respect on Audio forums?

Double blind test are not science , they are tool useful for example in pharma research coupled with statistic , never on an individual basis ... Simple blind test are useful tool in the designing process on an individual basis NEVER as debunking tool "per se" more a testing tool ...

Most techno cultist conflate science with his tools , as Dr, Fauci confused his statistics use with science, but for Fauci it was greed and power not a confusion created by naivete at all ...😊

“That, and it’s not a YouTube video but a SoundCloud recording. What’s the matter, can’t you listen that long? Do you need pictures/video to keep your interest? Would what he said throw buckets of cold water on your position?

The Harmon Speaker Shuffler is located in Northridge, Ca., which looks to have been developed in the early 2000s. In 1966, Toole conducted his very first tests on speakers and listening and Barton joined him around 1974, in Canada.

What are you so afraid of?”

Having to sit through an interview and then try to explain to how you misunderstood it. Have you read Toole’s book? Have you read Olive’s blog? Have you read any of their published research papers? 
 

@scottwheel You are very annoying person. It is my opinion and it's not based on simple blind test nor double blind test.

An excerpt from one of Sean Olive’s blog posts. 

“An ongoing controversy within the high-end audio community is the efficacy of blind versus sighted audio product listening tests. In a blind listening test, the listener has no specific knowledge of what products are being tested, thereby removing the psychological influence that the product’s brand, design, price and reputation have on the listeners’ impression of its sound quality. While double-blind protocols are standard practice in all fields of science - including consumer testing of food and wine - the audio industry remains stuck in the dark ages in this regard. The vast majority of audio equipment manufacturers and reviewers continue to rely on sighted listening to make important decisions about the products’ sound quality.

An important question is whether sighted audio product evaluations produce honest and reliable judgments of how the product truly sounds.

A Blind Versus Sighted Loudspeaker Experiment

This question was tested in 1994, shortly after I joined Harman International as Manager of Subjective Evaluation [1]. My mission was to introduce formalized, double-blind product testing at Harman. To my surprise, this mandate met rather strong opposition from some of the more entrenched marketing, sales and engineering staff who felt that, as trained audio professionals, they were immune from the influence of sighted biases. Unfortunately, at that time there were no published scientific studies in the audio literature to either support or refute their claims, so a listening experiment was designed to directly test this hypothesis. The details of this test are described in references 1 and 2.

A total of 40 Harman employees participated in these tests, giving preference ratings to four loudspeakers that covered a wide range of size and price. The test was conducted under both sighted and blind conditions using four different music selections.”

So please do tell me again what part of my assertion that they do double blind listening tests for subjective evaluations. 
 

you did get the date right when it comes to the Harman shuffler. Somehow you didn’t address your clams that their tests were quick switching.