To say people missed the gorilla because they weren't expecting it is plain wrong. The people who saw the gorilla weren't expecting it either. It was a cognitive loading experiment, plain and simple. The difference between people who saw or didn't see the gorilla was highly correlated with whether or not they had been given the cognitive loading task to do during the game.
My main reason to mention the "Gorilla in our midst" experiment back then was that it illustrates why the argument "if not detected it can´t be of practical relevance" is incorrect.
Simon´s used the results of the cognitive task as exclusion/inclusion criterion; only if the result (number of passes in the game) was correct the participant got the questions for the gorilla detection.
It would be interesting to know the percentage of nondetectors among those with incorrect pass-number results.
Simon´s used the results of the cognitive task as exclusion/inclusion criterion; only if the result (number of passes in the game) was correct the participant got the questions for the gorilla detection.
It would be interesting to know the percentage of nondetectors among those with incorrect pass-number results.
Are you an expert in human perceptions?
Your H.O. is the opposite of ABX intent. It's to eliminate the distractions caused by sight and expectation bias. It would be like removing those basketball players and focusing on gorilla alone when visual bias is removed in audio double blind test.
Despite missing the visual bias aspect, you did state essentially the same thing only couple months ago.
In properly run audio electronics DBT, listeners are allowed to compare equipment any subjective way they want first. Then when they find it worthy to do more objective comparison, level matched DBT is performed. I'll bet you've never participated in audio electronics DBT.
You would lose.
I am for blind testing, not against it. ABX is insensitive is all, so I prefer to use other blind and or double-blind protocols. In fact, I have described how one can usefully do one's own double blind testing of oneself. Nothing new here.
Remind me what the point is of listening tests that only show a difference, I presume that is all they can show in the end?
*gasp* No secret sauce? Be careful Richard, next you will be saying most competently designed and built amplifiers sound about the same!
Markw4, I agree with you. ABX is very insensitive, compared to other blind tests. I have done well with other blind tests, also.
Richard, in the spirit of new ideas, go for all bipolar designs. It is true that quality jfets are becoming more difficult to find, and are more expensive these days.
However, when it comes to just the transfer function, jfets are more 'linear' than bipolars, and tubes are more 'linear' than jfets. There are other advantages to jfets, including lower external RF sensitivity, low noise vs impedance, etc. and the ability to self bias.
However, when it comes to just the transfer function, jfets are more 'linear' than bipolars, and tubes are more 'linear' than jfets. There are other advantages to jfets, including lower external RF sensitivity, low noise vs impedance, etc. and the ability to self bias.
I'm still betting that you've never participated in audio electronics DBT.
Do you have a proof that Jakob2 couldn't cite? A proof that DBT causes debilitating stress that reduces hearing sensitivity to a point of prohibiting the listener to hear difference that changed when the stress is lifted?
Long time ago, we used a tape recorder with a loop of tape, to make echos in studios.
The problem was the tape (and the heads) used up pretty quickly.
It seems that technology has made a lot of progress:
Sermonizers who want to impose their cheap audio religion* to the rest of the world always turn round and round and round. They seem insensitive to wear and tear. And it is our heads who tire.
There is a french proverb that says: "Culture is like Jam. The less we have the more we spread it."
And an other that says "Luckily, ridicule does not kill."
Frankly you do not have anything more intelligent to do?
* their holy book is "The hifi for dummies".
The problem was the tape (and the heads) used up pretty quickly.
It seems that technology has made a lot of progress:
Sermonizers who want to impose their cheap audio religion* to the rest of the world always turn round and round and round. They seem insensitive to wear and tear. And it is our heads who tire.
There is a french proverb that says: "Culture is like Jam. The less we have the more we spread it."
And an other that says "Luckily, ridicule does not kill."
Frankly you do not have anything more intelligent to do?
* their holy book is "The hifi for dummies".
Last edited:
Not anymore! This saying just won Romanian citizenship.
This one is a double agent for sure!
Hi Mark,
How is ABX insensitive ?.
How do you do DIY BT ?.
Sorry if I missed your previous info, could you please give a quick summary of what you find.
Dan.
So with tight temp control this is a useful single stage amp ?.
Dan.
Nope.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/the...owtorch-preamplifier-ii-9085.html#post4992367
john curl said:
john curl said:
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.