It was very good and retro too, duck a l'orange with real bitter (Seville) oranges. The modern foodies don't really understand the bitter sweet sauce was not to cut the fat, wild ducks were very lean and gamey but to cut the gameyness. I hope you saved the liver and hung the venison well. I don't know if you ever tested your limits but I had some wild boar that was dry aged to liquefaction like a cheese, the waiter begged me not to subject the rest of the guests to its presence.
No I haven't tried anything like that. I did try something called colonnata after a tour of a marble mine this spring in Italy. The deer was aged nicely and fed well on acorns and my apples.
Scott,
And I thought that those bull Testies were brave enough when I was in Germany. I will say they were much better than the rabbit there, that was some gamey tough stuff. I think I'll stick with the quail, they don't live long enough to get gamey. Don't remember that I really liked Venison, I'll stay with a nice steak, grass feed if possible. But if you are ever on the Island of Kauai in Princeville do try the Bison, better than any steak you'll have.
And I thought that those bull Testies were brave enough when I was in Germany. I will say they were much better than the rabbit there, that was some gamey tough stuff. I think I'll stick with the quail, they don't live long enough to get gamey. Don't remember that I really liked Venison, I'll stay with a nice steak, grass feed if possible. But if you are ever on the Island of Kauai in Princeville do try the Bison, better than any steak you'll have.
Would you care to tell us what "positive controls" you think they should used?See for comparison the linked (some posts ago) publications by Oohashi et al. and Nichigushi et al. . ... loadsa stuff ...
And last but not least, the experimenters did not use positive controls.
IMHO, the Oohashi et al & Nichigushi et al methods are rather less stringent than Meyer & Moran. Only my $0.02 as a (pseudo?) Blind Listening Test guru
If one player had slightly poor low level linearity, what about the other players used in the test? Are you suggesting they were faulty too?
If this was a sighted test, do you think the "slightly poor low level linearity" would have affected the results? In the case of JC, I don't think so as he doesn't even have to listen to come to his conclusion.
Not that I would attribute such rare skills to anyone else on this august forum.
Half an hour into 2013 here.
Happy New Year to All
George
You too. Greek food has taken a back seat here in recent times, I found a very interesting restaurant in SF that I can't wait to try.
I do love the grass fed beef in Waimea on the big island. I have not been to Kauai since my honeymoon in 1985.
Hare is an aquired taste if it is truely wild served up in its own blood, civet de livre in French, IIRC hassen in German.
Kgrlee,
If you are only doing a test to determine if a group of people can hear a difference in multiple sources I have no problem with that as being a legitimate test condition. But when you are testing to see if you need to band limit the frequency response so people would prefer that band limitation then I have a major problem with that test. Unless the speakers that are being used for the test are completely accurate and have no resonant problems in the upper frequencies I would called that a flawed or biased test method. It would be way to easy to get the result that you want in that test. I could use many metal dome tweeters and come to the same conclusion, but that is a very poor test indeed.
If you are only doing a test to determine if a group of people can hear a difference in multiple sources I have no problem with that as being a legitimate test condition. But when you are testing to see if you need to band limit the frequency response so people would prefer that band limitation then I have a major problem with that test. Unless the speakers that are being used for the test are completely accurate and have no resonant problems in the upper frequencies I would called that a flawed or biased test method. It would be way to easy to get the result that you want in that test. I could use many metal dome tweeters and come to the same conclusion, but that is a very poor test indeed.
The "fussiness" component is crucial in audio: if you ignore it, or dismiss it as not being particularly relevant then you will most likely never hit the heights that are possible ...
This was just an excuse to wish all who are about to supposedly fall from a great height, Happy New Year
! -- 2012 is done and dusted down here ...Frank
I think you are all looking down the wrong path to understan audio perception. The Lossy codec guys have done an enormous amount of work in understanding our hearing and have been very suvvessful. Ignoring there understanding is I think naive. We may want to exploit the knowledge differently but the basics of what they have leared could contributes to what we want to accomplish.
I sat through a lecture at Dolbylabs on how they test codecs. It was remarkably rigorous and effective. Its much easier to program tests for codecs that for speakers but the principles are similar, just no mechanicals needed. They even have serious analysis software to verify results.
A lot of what seems important there assaults our basic principles, however when banging your head against such issues as whether phase above 10 KHz matters, a better understanding of the tricks used may yield some insights. My understanding is that even pitch is less important, just the energy and its timing. Given that the waveform changes with distance this could make sense.
I sat through a lecture at Dolbylabs on how they test codecs. It was remarkably rigorous and effective. Its much easier to program tests for codecs that for speakers but the principles are similar, just no mechanicals needed. They even have serious analysis software to verify results.
A lot of what seems important there assaults our basic principles, however when banging your head against such issues as whether phase above 10 KHz matters, a better understanding of the tricks used may yield some insights. My understanding is that even pitch is less important, just the energy and its timing. Given that the waveform changes with distance this could make sense.
My intention was much more humble.
I hope the results of my tests would be of use to the majority of listeners.
Some would have speakers with good supersonic performance and some not.You can consider the test similar to "should you change all your resistors to ones hand carved by virgins out of solid Unobtainium and recommended by our Lord JC."
The difference is that the test is double blind bla bla ...
ie does this evil component (the brickwall filter) actually make YOUR system sound better?
Of course if you conduct or know of such a test and find a different result from what I, and other people, have found please tell us.
I leave it to other gurus to ..
- explain why (ie produce theories that fit the evidence)
- or explain why it can't possibly happen (produce theories that don't fit the evidence)
The 1980 (?) test was with speakers with 30kHz response as measured by a 1/4" B&K mike. The treble unit was a 19mm 'soft' dome from a material that is now sadly Unobtainium.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.