Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site olivee.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!olivee!greg
From: greg@olivee.UUCP (Greg Paley)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: CD player differences
Message-ID: <467@olivee.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 12:23:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: olivee.467
Posted: Mon Aug 26 12:23:18 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Aug-85 20:45:45 EDT
References: <456@olivee.UUCP> <4150@alice.UUCP> <463@olivee.UUCP> <1613@druil.UUCP> <1177@teddy.UUCP>
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 24

> 
> So, Mr. Paley, pontificate not on the unimportance of reducing variances
> in tests, it is real damned important! Unless you can point to specific
> experiments that support your claim of either the non-audibility, or the
> lack of long-term importance of mis-matched levels, then I would, too,
> recommend, especially in the light of real experiments like the one I
> described, make damn sure your levels are as closely matched as possible.
> 
> Dick Pierce

The reason I dismissed level matching in the CD comparisons we did was
because of the fact that we were not doing A-B switching tests.  We
were (as I explained in my original article), listening to each player
in stretches of at least 20 minutes to a half an hour at a time.  If
we were doing A-B switching, I agree that the level matching would have
been significant.  However, we took several hours to compare only three
players, playing each one through two different sets of speakers and at
various volume settings.

Also, I don't recall pontificating - I was recounting how I
and a couple of friends went about a CD player comparison.  If my
methodology doesn't appeal to you, then don't use it!

	- Greg Paley