Hi Cooper!
I can't speak on the technical side of this as I'm still pretty much a newbie when it comes to audio equipment--and I don't know the technical/engineering side like many others here do. But like FHW, I am also a scientist by training, and I have no problems with wanting to see some support for claims. I also feel strongly that a critical philosphical element of any kind of objective, scientific experimentation is disciplined attention to the null hypothesis...the "starting point" that says there is no difference (whether it be the perceived efficacy of a pharmaceutical vs. an existing one or a placebo, or the transmission qualities of different kind of speaker wire). When you say "What's dangerous to me is to come to some conclusion when no difference is detected", I think just the opposite...until a difference is detected it's dangerous to think one exists.
I know we're not talking about earth-shattering issues here--it's auditory equipment not cancer drugs, and life is too short for us not to be enjoying it, including joy in listening to music. But at the same time if someone makes a claim (whether they're a manufacturer promoting their product or otherwise) I'm always interested to see if their claims hold up. As an example, I'd love to see if folks could distinguish between similar-spec'd receivers given the same accoustic setup...I think it'd be really interesting and answer some questions (maybe it's been done already). In any case, this kind of information helps me make better (and more informed) purchase decisions as a consumer, and IMO also ultimately promotes better engineering vs. a heavy reliance on marketing (you know who's the KING of THAT).
Sorry if I missed your point Cooper (and I'm stepping off my improvised soapbox). I agree with you that ultimately it's up to each person to make their own decisions; I'll just always welcome the ol' p-values when doing so.
Take care all.
Larry
