cleeds,
What I do think is odd is that those who clamor for others to pursue measurements or blind testing seem so reluctant to undertake the work themselves.
Like who?
I defend the validity of blind testing, and I have performed a number of blind tests.
But first, let's deal with an implication one could take from your statement (whether you meant to imply this or not):
The idea that if someone critiques X method over Y method, that they have to be involved in performing those experiments themselves. It should be obvious that isn't the case.
You don't need to be a scientist yourself, to understand why a scientific approach to treating a new pathogen is more sound than, say, appealing to dreams, demons, magnetic bracelets, or ground up rhino horns are less sound approaches. You just need to understand well enough the reason science operates as it does, and how this explains it's success relative to the failure of the other models.
It's similar to why you don't have to be a brain surgeon yourself, to rationally conclude if you are having signs of an aneurysm, that you should see a brain surgeon not a vacuum salesman, no matter how enthusiastic the vacuum salesman may be about using vacuums to cure your problem. You have enough knowledge to recognize from which direction sound and successful results derive, vs more dubious methods.
Same for audio or any other domain. As long as you recognize the existence of the variables of human bias, you are in a position to ask who is taking that problem most seriously in their methods of evaluation.
People who say "I know there is a sonic difference between A and B simply because I believe to have heard it" are not taking the problem of bias seriously, whereas people attempting to verify phenomena through objective measurements and listening tests that attempt to control for bias at least ARE taking it seriously in their method.
As I've said this DOES NOT mean that everyone needs to be blind testing, or can't just go on what they think they hear. No one is forcing, or should force, such a thing. We are all free to buy on whatever criteria we want, as it should be. But if someone wants to CLAIM there is an objective phenomenon happening - like cable burn in - then it's completely reasonable to look at what type of method they are using to demonstrate the claim.
As to my own blind tests, I've used bind tests between CD players/DACs, some audio cables, power cables, video cables, and digital servers.
I don't do this all the time - far from it - because as I've said no one is compelled to make decisions via such methods and frankly while sometimes they are fun, they can be a hassle. It would be a different case if I had a lab and all the right expensive measuring tools, not to mention more technical knowledge. But, I don't. That's not my field of expertise.
When I want to blind test something, I simply do the best I can within my meagre means, and I don't make claims that extend beyond what those meagre means can actually imply for me personally.
