[Synchrodyne]

I recall that at the time the report on the Quad comparative amplifier tests was published, there were some hi-fi magazine writers who refuted the results, sometimes with speculative reasons as to why the conclusion was – in their view – flawed. But what I never saw was a rigorous treatment that demonstrated that statistically significant differences did exist, nor any rigorous rebuttal of the Quad testing outcome. Perhaps, in the intervening 43 years someone has done the work and published the results?

Insofar as proving that something (in this case a difference) does exist is generally thought to be easier than proving that it does not, then those who would challenge the Quad results might be expected to have had an easier pathway than did Quad.


Cheers,