Originally Posted by Swampfox
Provide a reference to an article in a referred journal such as AES that shows that all listeners can hear the difference between 12 g and 20 g cable with level matched signals.
Your request is completely disingenious.
I have said "connect the wire". The way I described doing this was clearly excluding
level matching. Using small cables is a way for a person to make at least a decent attempt at controls in an experiment where equipment and measurement are not possible.
Nobody, myself included, has claimed this is the BEST way. It certainly is not, if one has the lab and the equipment. The person who started this thread, whose behavior has greatly outclassed the objectivists here, does not have such meters available. I have, therefore, suggested a way that he can informally, at least, add a positive control. In doing so, I have specifically not said a thing about level matching, and you already know that, unless you only read every other word.
You now disingeniously demand proof for something I have not claimed. IN THIS CASE the use of small wire is intended to cause a small, audible level mismatch. I have said as much several times, ergo your demand that I prove the audibility of a level-matched test is outright rhetorical deceit.
If one level matches, is this audible? I doubt it, frankly, unless we have a very seriously "interesting" kind of speaker impedence, but since I haven't made the claim either way, demanding proof from me of the audibility of this is, I repeat, pure disingenuity on your part.
Yet, I am lectured by the two of you on manners. Goodness.
Swampfox, I have no idea why you persist in this charade.
While I agree with you that people who claim the affirmative, i.e. that they hear something, have the burden of proof, your claim that one cannot test the test is simply wrong, and as such is nonsense.
Suggesting or implying that one can not catch deliberate malfeasance by a subject in a test is simply absurd, and as such, is nonsense
I do agree that sometimes people forget to include such issues in their test design, that's one of the reasons why I entered this discussion.
What have I found? Unreasonable misstatements, false implications of what I've said, and people willing to accuse me of professional misconduct without even the veriest hint of a reason to do so.
I am not obligated to be polite to absurdities.