What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?
linnvolk My “simple test” was not intended to be a full specification.Thank goodness! An obvious requirement is for there to be a controlled amount of time, the same whether switching or not, between rounds.I don’t think that’s an obvious requirement at all. Blind listening test subjects are usually allowed as much time as they need. There are very good reasons for that, by the way, but the real point is that conducting a scientifically valid listening test is a lot trickier than it looks to the casual observer who’s never undertaken such an exercise. |
I dont understand the concern of those like dletch2 for the rest of us deluded souls. I also dont understand why these folks think that the biases they suffer are endemic to the human race and also the apparent need to put all of us hobbyists in such a narrowly defined box. I dont think it is such a stretch to believe that through experience and exposure to exceptional systems that some can hear better than others. I remain confident in the buying decisions I make and the methodology I use to make these decisions. Anyway, as is usually the case, this thread is going nowhere. Oh I dont see any reason that a passive cable should experience any sort of directionality. But I truly dont know and I truly dont care. If the maker of a cable puts arrows on the cable I will abide. |
Blind listening test subjects are usually allowed as much time as they need.@cleeds, the listener can take all the time desired during the round. Requiring the same time between rounds is to make sure that the same time elapses between rounds whether switching cable directions or not. A counterexample is a recent(?) test that Rick Beato either performed or mentioned in which the respondents were to attempt to tell the difference between a "cd" quality and a "high-resolution" quality recording of the same music. Some of the respondents were clever enough to intentionally game the system by realizing that the larger files took longer to load. Even if not intentionally "cheating," the differing load times lent an unwanted bias to the test. (I think you probably understand all this and perhaps did not read my post carefully.) I concede that there are some details that would need to be attended to, but still maintain that a fairly simple test along the lines I described would be enlightening and perhaps conclusive. To reject the hypothesis that one cannot hear directionality, multiple persons who make the claim to be able to hear would have to be tested and found not to be able to make the right call a statistically significant amount of the time. However, if we can find one person who can consistently tell the difference, then I would say that that "proves" that some can hear the difference. (And I doubt that I would be one of those.) |
I also don't understand why these folks think that the biases they suffer are endemic to the human race Because they are. You may not understand this, but that does not make it any less true. Application specific knowledge reduces bias. The people who get the most abuse on these forums are those most immune to bias. This is not conjecture, but has been shown repeatedly in subjective testing fields. I have never avoiding blind testing, and because of that, I know, for fact, that audiophiles, just like everyone else are susceptible to bias, and expensive systems and listening experience appears do not inoculate a person from bias, no more than a sugar solution inoculates against a virus. Lifelong audiophiles with expensive systems are just as susceptible as anyone, and if they have convinced themselves of their infallibility, then they are even worse. I believe @Mijosytn in another thread pointed out that there is the ability, if desired, to train yourself to be better to pick up changes, but this is beyond the capabilities of most audiophiles as they cannot generate the controlled changes necessary, and as obvious in this thread, are unwilling to remove their eyes from the equation. |
