Once had someone seriously claim that the fact blind tests don't show differences heard in unblind tests proves that blind testing is flawed
-
-
-
Replying to @bitteranagram @kevin_bowen
Now that we're done chuckling, realize people understand words better if there's a moving in-sync mouth they can see. This is well tested.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @kevin_bowen @bitteranagram
there is at least one auditory test (word comprehension) where scores are improved with visual input (a moving mouth).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @djinnius @kevin_bowen
I was talking about perceived quality of sound from musical instruments and audio equipment; not sure that's the same thing
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bitteranagram @kevin_bowen
It's a confounding factor in something which is already subtle and difficult to test. The senses do not operate in isolation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @djinnius @kevin_bowen
Are you saying that not seeing the violin impairs one's ability to evaluate its sound? Bad news for recorded music, I guess
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bitteranagram @kevin_bowen
I think any serious devotee of classical music would agree it sounds better live.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @djinnius @kevin_bowen
The test was live; listeners couldn't see violin. Article questions whether ppl can distinguish a Strad from a new model if they aren't told
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I believe my reply is what you'd call a "tangent". The enjoyment of listening to a Stradivarius play is not captured in a blind test.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.