Posted by Guest on 11/09/06 17:02

--
This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com

http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
"Jim Gilliland" <usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote in message
news:455332d0$0$26447$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> Guest wrote:
>
>> See son, you are biased without even giving it a try for yourself.
>>
>> You say that I am delusional, but how come I see scratches on the film
>> when I saw none with the generic? How come details are brighter, cleaner
>> and earth materials look as they should?
>
> The simple answer is that the differences that you perceive don't really
> exist. You believe that you see them, but that IS your delusion. That's
> the problem with your flawed testing mechanism. Don't feel bad about it,
> it happens to every member of our species.
>

I see the difference. If I did not, I would feel bad about having purchased
an uneeded cable.

> If you want to eliminate bias, you must use a double blind mechanism.

Bias was eliminated from the start. Yes, some of us do have impartial
minds! I knew the movie on my player(Panasonic DVD-s97S) and I watched for
changes. If there were none then that would be they way it wold have been.
However, there were some serious changes and I am glad that I made the move.
You can read my other posts to know of the changes. The most glaring is
more film scratches and a cleaner picture.

That
> means that you must set up a set of tests where you don't know which cable
> is being used, and furthermore, where the person administering the test
> doesn't know which cable is being used. Only under those circumstances
> can you eliminate bias from the test.
>
> Experiments that don't follow double-blind procedures do not produce
> meaningful results. Humans ARE biased, and we are incapable of
> suppressing that bias in these situations.

YOU may be incapable of supressing bias, but I am. I know even judges are
biased, but they should not be. I am not. How and why would I be biased
against myself? That does not make sense.

So the only way to achieve a meaningful result is to
> completely remove the information on which the bias is based.

I can condut the experiment how I choose. The blind test does not let me
know if there is a difference. Like I wrote, I saw this movie at least 500
times, so I know what is what.

>
> BTW, I'm not your son.
>
> http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_plac.htm
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-blind
>
> Of course, you are free to continue to enjoy your system with whichever
> cables give you the most pleasure. And, if you like, you can continue to
> believe that you see or hear substantial differences between them. But in
> the absence of a properly controlled and documented test, you shouldn't
> expect others to accept your claims - especially when they contradict
> well-established norms.
>
> Keep in mind that there is one further problem with your claims, one that
> I tried to bring out with my sarcastic remarks yesterday. You claim to
> have heard audible differences between digital transmission paths that are
> simply not possible. There is no mechanism that could provide the
> differences that you described. Digital audio just doesn't work that way.
>
> So you've asked us to accept something that we know to be impossible. And
> you've done so without a single shred of usable evidence. Is it any
> wonder that everyone here has rejected your claims?

[Back to original message]