Oh, but the scientific design in this test is on par with researching how fast humans can run 100 meters. Then your sample group consists of a mix of elite runners, some average joes and a selection of nursing home residents. But to spice it up, some of the participants choose to run on a run track, some choose to run through a dense forest, and some choose to run on a dry sandy beach.Harking back to my 3rd Year Uni "Statistical Interpretation Unit" .... if roughly half-could hear differences but could not reliably pick which is which -and- the other half couldn't hear any major differences and also could not reliably pick which is which ..... then by statistical definition its a total "wash" or what we officially termed as a "complete mutual cancellation" ....
I will say again though that 3 was clearly [ to me ] way different to the other 3 - that was immediate on playback - but non-one had any idea what it was - including me.
I also think Cliff is bang on the $$$$ about the QC modelling - if you listen to any demo's of just its inbuilt amps they all have something really weird going on in the low-mids / low end ... its a really obvious -and i.m.h.o - bad "signature".
Ben
Or rather, since this test is in the 'are all swans white' category, you may say, that if some participants consistently can identify black swans, you know that they are in Australia (or New Zealand?).
Last edited: