ABX funny

[adam71 5,000+ posts]

Good stuff, but I would still need my IB sub //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

IB ?? Infinite baffle?? OR what is that??

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

IB ?? Infinite baffle?? OR what is that??

Yes infinite baffle. I have 8 15" drivers manifold mounted in my attic. I love the IB sound.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

I have never heard thos dipole speakers.... But the 600 Series is very nice sounding for sure.

Also, demo the subs. The only think I don't like about B&W is their lower end subs. For the money MartinLogan or others are a little better....

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

abx and double blind testing are great for all kinds of things, like curing diseases, to take that one step further. It's part of the cause for arguably every major advancement of human knowledge in the last 150 years (it's all part of the scientific method). For some people, if we use it to test a persons hearing, well it's useless. To say you can hear convince yourself of anything is quite true, to use it to dismiss an ABX test is ignorant. The entire point of the test is you dont' know what your actually listening to. Your simply forced to judge what you hear based on that alone, the sounds that you actually hear. Not the names on the box, not the pricetag, or what a scientist told you it's should sound like. ABx testing is about as real world as it gets, like it or not. It eliminates all the other variables and actually allows you to test what's truly relevant.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

abx and double blind testing are great for all kinds of things, like curing diseases, to take that one step further. It's part of the cause for arguably every major advancement of human knowledge in the last 150 years (it's all part of the scientific method). For some people, if we use it to test a persons hearing, well it's useless. To say you can hear convince yourself of anything is quite true, to use it to dismiss an ABX test is ignorant. The entire point of the test is you dont' know what your actually listening to. Your simply forced to judge what you hear based on that alone, the sounds that you actually hear. Not the names on the box, not the pricetag, or what a scientist told you it's should sound like. ABx testing is about as real world as it gets, like it or not. It eliminates all the other variables and actually allows you to test what's truly relevant.

Real world as it gets is setting for hours and hours and listening and picking apart the weaknesses. People are tolerant to things, let's use the weather for example. When it is summer time 60 feels cold and when it is winter time 60 feel crazy warm. So, my point of this is as you listen to something for periods of time you begin to stop listening to the overall great sound and find the weak points. So, in a ABX session lets say you listen 15 minutes to A, then 15 minutes to B, then go back and forth randomly between A&B. Because of the short amounts of time and because listening to something else changes the tolerances of your hearing there would be no way to distinctly pick between the two. If you could listen to them both at the same time (which you can't) for the exact amount of time at with the same material you would defiantly for sure be able to tell things apart. But, since you can't do that we will never know for sure.

I don't see how a experiment with sound could be compared to years of technological advancement and medical technology. In most scientific experiments either something is different or not, and in many cases electronic equipment is used to measure this change. BUT, in a Sound ABX testing electronic equipment can not be used (and it is obvious why). I am not saying in ABX is totally flawed BUT, the way that these tests are setup is why people always fail.

 

[thylantyr 10+ year member]

BUT, the way that these tests are setup is why people always fail.

Always fail ? lol

My first post on this thread.. -> http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx.htm

Did you read it ?

Here's a distortion ABX where if you start to exceed 3% distortion it

becomes audible and people passed.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_dist.htm

Here's more tests that people passed.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_f4.htm

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_spk.htm

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_phca.htm

etc.

Why do you assume everyone fails an ABX test? You don't even know

what is being tested to make that claim.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

BUT, the way that these tests are setup is why people always fail.
Always fail ? lol

My first post on this thread.. -> http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx.htm

Did you read it ?

Here's a distortion ABX where if you start to exceed 3% distortion it

becomes audible and people passed.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_dist.htm

Here's more tests that people passed.

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_f4.htm

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_spk.htm

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_phca.htm

etc.

Why do you assume everyone fails an ABX test? You don't even know

what is being tested to make that claim.

Let me reword myself then.

The way a lot of ABX tests are setup; small differences, usually below 3% THD, are not noticed because the listener does not have the time to develop a tolerance to the system and with the changing of systems the listener’s tolerance changes thus making it even more difficult to pick out differences over a short period of time. Consequently, this is the reason that most people fail when the THD is below 3%. Now, some tests people will pass because the difference in the sound is a very obvious one. Also, did you look at your "sample" group on some of those tests. 1 person isn't a very good sample group.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

poppycock

 

[thylantyr 10+ year member]

Let me reword myself then.
The way a lot of ABX tests are setup; small differences, usually below 3% THD, are not noticed because the listener does not have the time to develop a tolerance to the system and with the changing of systems the listener’s tolerance changes thus making it even more difficult to pick out differences over a short period of time. Consequently, this is the reason that most people fail when the THD is below 3%. Now, some tests people will pass because the difference in the sound is a very obvious one. Also, did you look at your "sample" group on some of those tests. 1 person isn't a very good sample group.

no

The human ear is not a precision instrument like an electronic measuring device.... unless yer Superman and live in the world of fantasy.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/swordfight.gif.e3de6069f3ffe402fc3ab4a827365101.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wallbash.gif.1310150c49dd52e0fbe1813a0681e5c3.gif

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

no
The human ear is not a precision instrument like an electronic measuring device.... unless yer Superman and live in the world of fantasy.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/swordfight.gif.e3de6069f3ffe402fc3ab4a827365101.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wallbash.gif.1310150c49dd52e0fbe1813a0681e5c3.gif

Superman's a weirdo... I mean who the hell wears a cape!

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

Let me reword myself then.
The way a lot of ABX tests are setup; small differences, usually below 3% THD, are not noticed because the listener does not have the time to develop a tolerance to the system and with the changing of systems the listener’s tolerance changes thus making it even more difficult to pick out differences over a short period of time. Consequently, this is the reason that most people fail when the THD is below 3%. Now, some tests people will pass because the difference in the sound is a very obvious one. Also, did you look at your "sample" group on some of those tests. 1 person isn't a very good sample group.

want to guess how long your auditory memory last, like what is considered "long term"? It's been tested, and lets just say if your not switching things out pretty fast, you're more than likely not going to be able to pick out small differences.

Anyway, what I was referring to was the scientific method. Only changing the 1 variable you want to test in a controlled environment. This method, is the spirit of ABX testing and is the driving force of human achievement in the past 200 years or so. Say what you will, if you can't tell the difference between test tones switching back and forth continuously, with amount of distortion added, your not going to hear ti when it takes 30 seconds to change things around on music. Even if you did, in the "real world" you'd be changing alot more than just the THD.

If it makes you feel any better, people who are psychic don't believe in controlled experiments either.

 

[joetama 5,000+ posts]

want to guess how long your auditory memory last, like what is considered "long term"? It's been tested, and lets just say if your not switching things out pretty fast, you're more than likely not going to be able to pick out small differences.
Anyway, what I was referring to was the scientific method. Only changing the 1 variable you want to test in a controlled environment. This method, is the spirit of ABX testing and is the driving force of human achievement in the past 200 years or so. Say what you will, if you can't tell the difference between test tones switching back and forth continuously, with amount of distortion added, your not going to hear ti when it takes 30 seconds to change things around on music. Even if you did, in the "real world" you'd be changing alot more than just the THD.

If it makes you feel any better, people who are psychic don't believe in controlled experiments either.

3 minutes 54 seconds 32 milliseconds? Am I close.. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/up2something.gif.dd110ecf3ae4b76050d87598f2f8de7c.gif

Oh and I am psychic... Maybe it was psycho, spelling is so close you know....

 

[thylantyr 10+ year member]

A switch box only takes a fraction of a second to switch - unless it was designed

differently.