No, I do not believe I am missing anything, and I have rethought positions on many items.
Techniques and theories that are properly aligned are wonderful tools. Many times the theoretical end points justify the procedures, sometimes they do not.
I can understand your defending them, since many quality observations have emerged from NRC. I hold many things I have experienced resulting from research performed there in high regard. While others are simply pandering to the masses. In terms of audio, I refuse to believe that If I can honestly say there is a difference in something, and NRC has declared it is not so in whatever type of listening test, that I am imagining things. Many magazines make the same mistake, or go the complete opposite. Some of them use antiquated testing methods, or the testing labs have ties to the magazines. Hardly objective. But in this case I would agree that it is difficult to argue the validity of all testing. I researched an issue while in college, and I tested using similar methods, and newer proven techniques and found a differing result. Perhaps I will look at recent research.
As you mentioned, it is difficult to let go or change mindsets. I have several changes I am fighting with currently. Anytime an imperfect human (virtually every human) is involved, everything becomes subjective. This is an across the board statement, not singling anyone or issue out
Critical thinking and objectivity are learned traits. Proper scientific methods creates theories and works to prove or disprove them. The desired output is what is determined, not the other way around.
Regards,
BBIBH
