Why Is An ABX Box Required? A Proposed Solution!

Posted by thetubeguy1954 (A) on January 8, 2007 at 13:30:39

This is an honest question, so hopefully someone who's a proponent will take the time to explain why this is so, but first a "brief" explination of why it's being asked. It seems that everytime the the subject of DBTs is raised the proponents of DBTs demand that an ABX be added or else in their opinion it's not a valid DBT!

My question is this: Why would using a person whose both unseen and unaware of why he's switching the wires manuelly, be any less of a valid form of a DBT?

I believe if the proponents of DBTs were to accept this method of performing the tests it would alienate a lot less of the opponents of DBTs who object to the insertion of an ABX box and a second set of interconnects! In addition it would strengthen the DBT's proponents arguement that the validity of DBTs have been proven via it's many trials in the medical field. For it would make audio DBTs more like medical DBTs.

As it stands there's no equivalent of adding an ABX box and a second set of interconnects in medicial DBTs, like there is in audio. From my admittedly limited understanding of medical DBTs. I believe in medical DBTs adding 2 substances of unknown inertness (which would be like adding the ABX box and the additional interconnects and their unkown additional "inertness" i.e., the addition of their sonic attributes or lack of them) would automatically invalidate the medical DBT in and of itself!

I could be wrong, but acceptance of manuel switching by an unseen person who doesn't know why they're switching the wires would go a looooonnggg way towards bridging the gap between opponents and the proponents of DBTs....

Thetubeguy1954

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Topic - Why Is An ABX Box Required? A Proposed Solution! - thetubeguy1954 13:30:39 01/08/07 (30)

Ways blind tests in audio and medicine differ - okiemax 20:32:50 01/09/07 (4)

I don't even play a doctor on TV........ - Mudcat 04:03:47 01/17/07 (0)

Most important ways blind tests in audio and medicine differ... - mkuller 21:25:44 01/09/07 (2)

Not exactly - Lynn 19:40:10 01/10/07 (1)

Eggs Ackley... - mkuller 21:15:36 01/10/07 (1)

An ABX is not required. - Pat D 14:07:33 01/09/07 (9)

Re: An ABX is not required. - thetubeguy1954 05:55:00 01/10/07 (0)

I agree... - Lynn 17:38:19 01/09/07 (7)

Re: I agree... - bjh 18:30:04 01/09/07 (6)

Re: I agree... - Lynn 18:55:46 01/09/07 (3)

Re: I agree... - bjh 20:24:57 01/09/07 (2)

Who's a lawyer? - Ted Smith 20:29:33 01/09/07 (1)

Doh! Sorry bout that... where *do* I get my ideas? :( nt - bjh 20:31:28 01/09/07 (0)

Re: I agree... - Ted Smith 18:36:29 01/09/07 (1)

Re: I agree... - bjh 19:48:19 01/09/07 (0)

The ONLY solution - kerr 12:10:22 01/09/07 (2)

Maybe....But It's Strangely Quiet On The DBT Front - thetubeguy1954 13:01:29 01/09/07 (1)

It Was Like That On The Western Front During An Earlier Conflict (nt) - AJinFLA 18:54:22 01/09/07 (0)

Re: probably hopeless - mls-stl 11:05:53 01/09/07 (0)

Unseen and unaware when switching Manuelly? - AJinFLA 20:11:58 01/08/07 (7)

YES! Unseen & Unaware When Switching Manuelly? - thetubeguy1954 08:06:41 01/09/07 (6)

Still don't get it - AJinFLA 17:31:54 01/09/07 (2)

Re: Still don't get it - thetubeguy1954 06:11:43 01/10/07 (0)

Re: Still don't get it - okiemax 19:19:42 01/09/07 (0)

Hmmm, do you think the two groups wish to be bridged? - Russ57 09:38:22 01/09/07 (2)

I'm Pessimistically Optimistic... (NT) - thetubeguy1954 12:03:07 01/09/07 (1)

Me too. - cheap-Jack 10:47:06 01/10/07 (0)

Re: Why Is An ABX Box Required? A Proposed Solution! - tomservo 19:06:56 01/08/07 (1)

Re: Why Is An ABX Box Required? A Proposed Solution! - thetubeguy1954 10:07:19 01/09/07 (0)

Think I'll go track down a couple of georgelouis posts for a refreshing change of topic! nt - bjh 15:21:41 01/08/07 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.