[net.audio] "Only"--test methodology

jj@rabbit.UUCP (10/04/84)

>>...
>>       same mics, mic preamps, etc.). -- ditto. This is the ONLY way that
>>       you can make any meaningful comparisons between the technologies.
>>       Otherwise, there are so many variables (both hidden and out of your
>>       control) that any other conclusions are meaningless.
>>
>My comments:
>
>The use of "ONLY" here is nonsense.  Scientific reasoning is not "sound" --
>go back to theory of knowledge ideas.  Scientific reasoning is inductive,
>...
>all mean that other testing is useless.  It may be that the only way to
>convince a scientific research audience is through means such as are
>suggested, but "the ONLY way you can make any meaningful comparisons"?  No
>way.

The use of "ONLY" here is correct.  Since it is well known that such things
as different mike placement by a few mm, different mike preamps,
different mixing by fractions of DB <sorry, but most recordings ARE
mixed...> and the like ALL affect the perceived quality, the use of
"ONLY" here is exact, correct, and required.  

The comments about all other testing being useless is completely specious,
as it has NO bearing on the situation described in the first article.

I repeat:
	If you make a comparison that changes even ONE variable in your
test setup that is NOT one being tested, then your test is completely
devoid of meaning, information, and relevence.  It is possible to
substitute different instances of the same equipment under some circumstances,
but changing something as fundimental as microphones, placement, mike preamps,
or mixing is a clear, obvious, and absolute disqualification.


-- 
BE KIND TO SOFT FURRY CREATURES, THE 
LIFE YOU SAVE WILL BE YOUR OWN!
"I'm goin', I'm goin', where the water tastes like wine..."

(allegra,ihnp4,ulysses)!rabbit!jj