Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: MINe 109 <smcatut@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 21:15:33 GMT
In article <ctst9255gnqg01f292q46babl867d0nili@xxxxxxx>,
Sander deWaal <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
For Linnies: the difference between bloated bass and mid-bass lies in
the mat.
Replace the standard felt mat with a rubber (or better: a cork) one
and listen for yourself.
This is less of a problem in recent Linns (post-Cirkus mod).
Stephen
.
- References:
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Harry Lavo
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Arny Krueger
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: jeffc
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Arny Krueger
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Jenn
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: ScottW
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Jenn
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: ScottW
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Jenn
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: ScottW
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Sander deWaal
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Prev by Date: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Is the NYTimes...
- Previous by thread: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Next by thread: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|