Have we lost civility and respect on Audio forums?

From wikipedia :

«In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the perception of contradictory information and the mental toll of it.»

Then someone who trust his ears someday suddenly discovered that he could not trust them anymore ... This sudden discovery is so stressful that he embark on his crusade because he is coherent and want to solve his own stress problem after this sudden discovery and adopt double blind test method with rapid switching to calm his doubts after every purchase and he begin to preach everyone about it as if each person was like him stressed by the discovery that our hearing is not always trustfull...😊

This is cognitive dissonance ...

Myself i slowly learned how to trust my ears in the limit of a specific domain of activity : acoustic of room/system and audio optimization ...For sure i can be deceived sometimes then i used simple blind test as a tool ...But i never encountered a traumatic experience of self deception as some high end costly consumers who became stressed by their experience and stressed by the sudden understanding about their self deception ...

Then i was never myself in a state of cognitive dissonance nor in a crusade for truth ... I stayed always relaxed and never stressed occupied by my acoustic journey ..😊

that is straight up cognitive dissonance

Nobody negate the usefullness of double blind testing...

You dont get it scottwheel ..

But nobody here confuse laboratory protocols with home listening and audio optimization as a hobby ...

I dont need double blind testing protocol before purchase...

Some company as good  marketing practice could  gain to use it not only for publicity but for a continuous  improvement of the product...

What is annoying and preposterous  then is your fixation on double blind test as the only way to pick gear or to optimize our audio system ..Simple improvized blind test is enough ...

Did you get it ?

A hammer is not craftmanship, a double blind test is not science... It is a tool in the two cases which ask to be used at the right time for the right job and by the right person for a specific goal which is NEVER debunking  ...

@puptent thanks to real science and technology, i get a blood sugar reading every 5 minutes…. 

I also run a very heavily modified 1961 M240. I suspect we would get along well. Stop by anytime :-) i serve a mean Pinot, well you can decide if it’s Pinot as tge bartender…tends..to be…. double… blind

So the testimonial of some guy who worked with Toole is a better source on how Toole did his research than Toole and the actual published papers of Toole’s research? I disagree.

I've never seen anyone so afraid to listen to something that might mitigate, inform and help to broaden one's understanding of something like you do. Barton is not testifying; he's relating a past experience that's wholly relevant to this back and forth with you. I'm not saying Barton is a "better source" than Toole. He's been right there with Toole all along. 

All this tells me you're great at reading what you want and discarding the rest that doesn't conform to your views. You borrow someone else's work, cherry pick what you need, conflate things and hide behind your manufactured position. 

Every time I point you to that recording, you come back with evasion, side stepping something so simple as listening to another perspective that would help to educate yourself. Seems to me that you're aware, or feel it with your spidey senses, that you'd suffer a great heaping of cognitive dissonance yourself if you did so, hence the projection with your last post.

I see you soldiered on with another post while I wrote this so let me just say that nowhere in what you quoted from Olive's blog did he mention quick switching with the subjects. Yes, they used it, but for convenience. If you did read up on it, the speaker switcher could swap out a speaker in about 3 seconds but how long did it actually take before listening again? Cabling would have to be disconnected and reconnected. Toss in any number of things and they could have waited for a good 5 minutes before starting back up again. 

The tests I addressed in my "claims" were done a good 30-35 years before and all the way up to the speaker swapping device they came up with. I never said Toole, Olive and Barton didn't do blind listening tests. I didn't miss a thing.

All the best,
Nonoise

Now psychanalysing your motives and explaining your obsession for double blind test by the stress resulting from your discovery that we cannot trust our ears (which fact is not even wrong but which fact is not true either because we can and must learn how to train our ears) was perhaps an error i did trying to understand you ...

Perhaps you are only a techno- cultist objectivist in a crusade against deluded subjectivist audiophiles ... you are not the first one here ...

You never considered that "the faillibility" of human hearing was the reverse side of the coin , and reflect his creativity in perception of meanings ... We never hear sound as in physical waves, we hear meanings ...No perception exist without a concept behind it ... If not only meaningless chaos exist ...