fuses - the $39 ones or the 85 cent ones

08-20-08: Magfan
I suggest we drop this line. People have many ingrained
prejudi.

Why should we drop this line? It's been a
productive open discussion except for your smug, dogmatic interlopings
touting the junk science of DBT applied to listening
tests.

Am I supposed to be ashamed that I try to bring
a little logic and reason to this discussion?

That's an
arrogant assumption--that you're bringing logic and reason and the rest of
us are just stumbling in the dark without your
"enlightenment." You should be ashamed for being an interloping
troll.

Somebody tell me WHY
audiophiles are afraid of DBTing?

"Afraid"
isn't the word. "Dismissive" or "skeptical" is more like
it, and they're valid conclusions. Double blind testing was formulated for
testing efficacy of medical interventions (mostly medications) versus the
slight boost one might get from the placebo effect. In those cases either the
medication has an effect on the subject under test or it does not. Listening
tests are entirely different. In medication DBT tests, the subject is entirely
passive. No skills are required; results are tested and measured. Not so when
applied to audio. It depends on the subject under test (SUT) having the skill
to discern differences in a high pressure, time-sensitive test for an activity
(listening to music) normally associated with relaxation and non-critical
activity.

No one expects wine tasters to produce meaningful results without proper
orientation and training in the art and procedures of wine tasting. Why would
it be any different for discerning differences in audio.

DBTs applied to untrained, unoriented test subjects in audio is nothing but a
parlor trick to obscure meaningful differences that show up consistently in
other circumstances.

The reality is what you hear and enjoy. A test is simply a CONTRIVED way of
attempting to delineate and quantify those differences. Sometimes it works;
sometimes it doesn't. and if it doesn't. it doesn't prove a damn thing.