Why Do So Many Audiophiles Reject Blind Testing Of Audio Components?
Because it was scientifically proven to be useless more than 60 years ago.
A speech scientist by the name of Irwin Pollack have conducted an experiment in the early 1950s. In a blind ABX listening test, he asked people to distinguish minimal pairs of consonants (like “r” and “l”, or “t” and “p”).
He found out that listeners had no problem telling these consonants apart when they were played back immediately one after the other. But as he increased the pause between the playbacks, the listener’s ability to distinguish between them diminished. Once the time separating the sounds exceeded 10-15 milliseconds (approximately 1/100th of a second), people had a really hard time telling obviously different sounds apart. Their answers became statistically no better than a random guess.
If you are interested in the science of these things, here’s a nice summary:
Categorical and noncategorical modes of speech perception along the voicing continuum
Since then, the experiment was repeated many times (last major update in 2000, Reliability of a dichotic consonant-vowel pairs task using an ABX procedure.)
So reliably recognizing the difference between similar sounds in an ABX environment is impossible. 15ms playback gap, and the listener’s guess becomes no better than random. This happens because humans don't have any meaningful waveform memory. We cannot exactly recall the sound itself, and rely on various mental models for comparison. It takes time and effort to develop these models, thus making us really bad at playing "spot the sonic difference right now and here" game.
Also, please note that the experimenters were using the sounds of speech. Human ears have significantly better resolution and discrimination in the speech spectrum. If a comparison method is not working well with speech, it would not work at all with music.
So the “double blind testing” crowd is worshiping an ABX protocol that was scientifically proven more than 60 years ago to be completely unsuitable for telling similar sounds apart. And they insist all the other methods are “unscientific.”
The irony seems to be lost on them.
Why do so many audiophiles reject blind testing of audio components? - Quoraaudiophiles: trust your ears! my wife can hear how much better my system sounds with my $9000 power cord and she's in the kitchen with the dishwasher running! it's not subtle, a veil is lifted! also audiophiles: no I won't do a blind abx test, you can't trust your ears, hearing is flawed. keep slurping that Kool Aid. |
I’m confused by many things from time to time and am the first to admit my own limitations. I have yet to get my sensory functions confused, though, especially when it is being sought to demonstrate their infallibility. Never-mind some inanimate object revealing itself, I can cope with that on Audiogon.
|
@cd318 Autism is my gift, tool and best feature for vast most part, so much to thank. I just have some quarks, some find them funny and some they do not know what to do and get kind of scared so they don't get to know me. I have a great partner, son, adopted daughter, very good friends, and colleagues. To be frank I can't ask more from life. |
In blindtest to detect DIFFERENCE in sound working with the short term memory is the best yes... But a difference in sound is an IMPROVEMENT or a DEGRADATION in some direction relative to many aoustical cues at the same time : timbre spectral evenlope, timbre time envelope, imaging, soundstage, dynamic, LEV/ASW ratio, reverberation time, and others acoustical cues relating to the head/torso relation to each speaker for each ears... Then to detect if a difference will be qualified good or bad we need TIME and the detection must be made in a KNOWN acoustical environment with a known musical cues... To evaluate these changes only relatively long listening session linked to the body/feeling/ brain memory make sense in the acoustical room/ speakers TUNING direction.. We have very short term memory of sound yes but also a body memory linked to emotions associated with past sound long term experiences... It is why hearing sounds must be learned in acoustic and music....The long term memory is not a direct storage of the sound but a feeling engrammation related to the sound... This acoustic feeling is what a musician use to qualify a sound/music well done... Perfect pitch hearing is another matter...Most musician must learn to reproduce and recognize pitch...They learn how to feel it...And the feeling associated with the tone nevermind the timbre is memorized...It is why a minor chord or a major chord own different feeling meaning...Joy or sadness for example...
By the way i studied practical acoustic in my room for the last 2 years, i discovered that we dont understand what sound really is...i say that but i am not a scientist for sure...It is my informed opinion based on my listening experiments... Acoustic is a marvellous very complex field and philosophically super deep.... For example sound is not a wave but the wave is the image of the resonant body source.... For sure without air wave there is no sound hearing, but air also make possible fire but the air are not the fire but a cause of his qualitative manifestation.. To hear sound we need a resonant qualified body to be the source interacting though air wave with our ears ...To have fire we need a combusting matter interacting with air and our feeling body called that "hot"....... Human ears/brain are able to detect QUALITATIVE information from the resonant sound source by the mediation of the wave image...Like blind people use waves image trough a resonant echo to reconstruct without eyes the environment geometry and the object matter various densities around them ...
|
"...his father almost gave him a spank and asked if I knew or I was being me curious so he told me that short memory key in finding the right lenses, because the short memory comparison is key"
Thanks for sharing that interesting post. Short term memory comparison does seem to make a lot of sense whenever we have to rely upon our senses. Everytime I look at a picture or a scene and then close my eyes to visualise it, I’m always a little disappointed to find upon opening my eyes once more just how much detail and nuance had faded so fast. As for autism, unfortunately it still seems to be a mysterious condition, even in 2022. Best of luck to you.
|
The thing with extended auditioning is that there is a lot of adaptation and not working using short term memory. Kind of like going to the eye doctor, the changes in the lenses magnification is deliberately quick because one's brain is working in short term memory and very good at knowing what is good for him. Eye doctors don't send you with a lens to test for a week and see how your eye feel. There are a lot of papers discussing this subject in the Audio Engineering Society. I wish I could post some parts but my petition was denied. If one is really interested in these subjects it is worth joining, but be prepared to read long papers with a lot of math and statistics. Fun story, a few years back, I had my eye doctor and his dad, also an eye doctor, and I asked the young one if he knew why they change the lenses so fast and he said because he usually want to finish quickly, his father almost gave him a spank and asked if I knew or I was being me curious so he told me that short memory key in finding the right lenses, because the short memory comparison is key. Many times with my dealer we discussed why he plays one short passage and switch, and he says that after their blind test you should have 2 components you like over the others, and if you are unsure then buy the cheapest. My dealer also referrers to the long auditioning as a good way to find those things that bother one, like interfaces, switches, esthetics, and anything that is in the functionality domain and see if you like the sound in your home. All the times I leverage the long term, I only bought something else because something bothered me, I am autistic and some things just don't fit in my brain. Even if the component sounds better, whatever it is distract me from listening. English as nth language. |
@cd318 Thank you for reinforcing my point. The differences are often subtle and it takes me extended listening to discover those differences and see how I react to them. I have nothing "against" blind testing. Blind test your heart out. I don't however think it's an effective way for me to judge the sound quality of audio equipment. |
"When you meet a new person can you look at them for a few seconds and determine how they compare to the last person you met, or does it take time for their true nature and character to reveal itself? For me, it’s the same with audio components. It takes time to get to know them."
Fair enough, if you believe there might be parallels between comparing a human being with an electronic device - I can't fathom certain human beings even after knowing them for decades but that's another story - but what about those who went around espousing "night and day" differences, yet dare not risk undertaking a blind listening test between a $10 DAC and one costing 100 times as much? Let’s not forget that human perception evolved primarily to detect differences, which often meant danger. It’s something we’re very good at. Therefore if it really does take several days/ weeks to identify a sonic difference, which might only be due to a subtle anomaly in frequency response, then just how important could it be anyway? Furthermore, wouldn’t such delicate differences between frequency response will inevitably suit some material/systems and not others? In fact you could argue that when the detection of extremely marginal differences (which may well be down to manufacturing tolerances) takes such a long period of time how can we be sure that it’s not our mood/attitude that is actually changing instead of any increase in our perception? You can bet that the equipment on test will always be slitkre consistent than the human being doing the testing by ears alone. It’s quite one thing to say I love product X, it’s better built, has better backup service, but entirely another to say it’s clearly sonically better than product Y. Sonic differences are, I suspect, easily the most important factor when it comes to purchasing new equipment. Audiophiles change equipment in an attempt to upgrade their sound. I can’t see any reason why us consumers would have a problem with blind listening tests when auditioning potential upgrades. Money and sonic satisfaction are very important to most of us, aren’t they? So perhaps we should also ask that why is it primarily manufacturers, dealers and reviewers that have an issue with blind listening tests? Instead of embracing an additional way of evaluation, some them seem to be quite hostile.
Reviewers/shills/ad men/hacks/sales reps etc seem to be particularly cowardly/defensive/guarded/silent when it comes to reviewing blind. In fact I know not of a single one that would risk their ’reputation’ in this way. Not one. Why is this? Perhaps their fear of destroying their entire retail business model by revealing the emperor’s new clothes syndrome is real enough. It should be easy enough to arrange for most, but can you imagine any dealer offering the facilities for prospective customers to listen blind? Me neither. |
There is an acoustic signature of a room by itself, by virtue of his vibrating body... All rooms differ...Even if i tune them, why? For the same reason that the vibrating body of all violins differ from one another for an educated ear even when they are tuned by the musician himself... They always differ and this difference i call it yes their acoustic signature, their timbre ... Then the 2 rooms like the 2 violins will produce the same musical tonal playing but with a different sound timbre perception, so subtle the difference could be and will be, the difference will stay... This is the reason that we only know how sound an audio system in some specific conditions when we tune it ourself with the chosen room ...If we listen to it in another acoustic conditions , it will not change completely for sure, because like for the room which will sound different before and after his tuning , the audio system has his own internal acoustic signature which will express itself differently in different room ... It is his "timbre" expression so to speak...Like a human body can play the same tone than any other body but with a unique timbre expression... This is the reason why there is no absolute room and no absolutely perfect gear system...No absolute timbre perception either...Perfect hearing of perfect pitch is not the same phenomenon than timbre perception itself... «Pitch allows us to hear intonation in a language and notes in a melody. Timbre allows us to distinguish the vowels and consonants that make up words, as well as the unique sound qualities of different musical instruments. Combinations of pitch and timbre enable us to identify a speaker’s voice or a piece of music.» Then pitch perception and production is linked to some precise frequency tone, timbre is a more complex phenomenon related to the resonant human and musical body in an acoustic environment ... Timbre phenomenon cannot be reduced to only a spectrum envelope for example there is also a time envelope and way more related to the interaction with the acoustic environment around the resonant body ... Pitch perception will not change from a different room or from a different singer body to another one... Timbre will change from one room to another and from a singer to another one....
In a word multiple trade-off are at play in acoustic/psycho-acoustic ....There is no perfect room, no perfect instrument, no perfect ears, only perfect musical tone yes... Then your choice of words is neither true nor wrong...I only try here to convey my own limited understanding from my room tuning process... Remember that i am not a musician nor an acoustician either, i only made listenings experiments in my room... Then two room even tuned by me cannot sound similar, they own different signatures that i adapted to my own liking or ears/brain signature... If we put the same system in these 2 room, different in size, geometry, topology and acoustic content my tuning will transform them in something i like yes but different...( the audio system is part of this acoustic content of the room and the same system will sound in a different way in the two rooms) All of what i just said dont contradict the fact that picking between some different pieces of gear in a room tuned by me is a good idea Why? Because if i tuned the room i will not need a blind test to chose well... If i dont know the room signature it is better with a blind test yes... My best to you....
|
At home is a different history :) but in general in my ears the qualities of the a component transfer and by this time I already have a good sound map on the different rooms. Don't you believe that if 2 rooms are properly arranged for your ears they will sound fundamentally similar but with their own signature?
|
Interesting indeed... But my point was about the tuning of OUR room/speakers relation by our specific ears for a specfic speakers/system.. I dont need blind test for that... To choose a piece of gear i dont contest that this blind testing store is a good idea... Viva Barcelona! Thanks for this interesting story...
|
@mahgister Speakers with blind masks like the ones some people use to sleep. :) components are behind curtains(?)/drapes. I love the masks, my brain and ears focus a lot more. Yes, I can cheat by looking but then no need to cheat myself 🤣 The rooms setup are very smart, you can audition 3 different speakers on the same room, they are in a carousel that they can rotate quickly and adjust angles. Some have the ability to test 2 different set of components some 3, all can fit 2 turntables.. At the end if you are not sure on the components, you can get them installed in your listening place, there is a charge for the setup, that gets waived if you buy or are a repeating customer. The family is in the business since the late 30s one of the older audio stores in Barcelona and Spain. Every other month or 2 there is a full day on listening on the store, you can sign up in advance, he also has launching products and clothing and lingerie parties for our wives or partners. I do not mind paying a little more not just for the addons but because their customer service is incredible too. I wish there was something like this in the Seattle area.
|
How do you tune a room with blindtest? 😁😊 This tuning process is an addition of many hundred alternative changes, if not thousands on a period of many years for me... Then saying that i can be afraid of blindtest is bordering on ridiculous... I passed many "acidental" "haphazard " blind test by unforeseen circonstances sometimes with surprizing results in this journey, confirming the value of my tuning process... Saying that we are afraid of blindtest is borderline ridiculous argument... A singular change borderline audible can be doubted for sure and must be, like in a delicate buying option, but a streak of continuous change in one acoustic direction : for example a better timbre perception is always, in spite of errors in this direction which will be rectified, ineluctably programmed by listening non blind numerous experiments... But i understand it can be useful if someone is in a showroom and must choose between 2 components....It occur with success many decades ago when i was in the same buying circonstance.... But anyway there is no comparison between the same piece of gear BEFORE acoustic treatment and control and AFTER... Give me any relatively good piece of gear and i will use it with success if i can tune the room for it...The gear choice is LESS important than the rightful acoustic tuning process...Most people for sure think the exact opposite...It is like saying that sound come from the electronic design by itself alone not from his coupling with a room for the most part... No speakers can beat the room where they are located... Acoustic/psycho-acoustic method are the key, not blind test.... Which is a secondary tool at most ....
|
As for the simple question why those who refuse to do a blind test/audition to me there could be a few reasons, and 2 come to mind, being afraid to chose the component that "is best", or being afraid to realize that your position on a subject, for example like you say you can(n’t) distinguish the difference in AC or Ethernet cables is wrong. I have never bought a component without a blind test, my audio dealer facilitates that. All of his 6 audition rooms are set up for blind testing, all you need to say is I want to audition x,y,z he will also include one or 2 of his choice and then call you so you can audition until you have an ordered/ranking of the components you like best. If you tell him what components you have will will do his best to reproduce them so at the very least you have the reference. I have walked out many time spending a lot less, and many others spending a lot more :) The process is as long or short as you want, this is why to me blind auditioning is the best way to let my ears do the choice, and I have yet to walk away with a component that does measure great. As always, there are exceptions, like a PS audio powerplants, I know very well that will not do anything to my components' sound side because they are on the DC domain, but they are a nice looking power strip. |
I dont reject blindtest either... I reject the claim that it is ALWAYS a good thing to eliminate biases, i reject the claim that all biases must be eliminated in audio experience for the sake of measuring numbers specs instead... It is the correlation PROCESS between subjective and objective, the backbone of acoustic/ psycho-acoustic science... I accept blind test to be a necessity in the industry and sometimes a self inflicted tool and discipline...Thats all... Never a universal remedy replacing listenings experiments... In learning listening acoustic/psycho-acoustic experiments, the biases accumulation and orientation is the WAY, blindtest is only used sparsely here as a tool.... |
How about because it is hard to do. I am a clinical research scientist as well and have a deep appreciation of biased ascertainment of endpoints. Nevertheless, it is fairly easy for me to hear differences in amps, preamps, dacs and CD transports that blinding won’t help cause I am impressed with how my brain tells me that my pre-listening biases are in the wrong direction. Great example, I put in an ASI Teknology modded Black Ice hybrid preamp in my reference system and was blown away by the spacious, clear, crystalline sound that had spot on tonality and tone colors. It replaced an Audiogon cult preamp and despite my clear expectation that the cult preamp would be better, it wasn’t. If you are trying to discern very modest differences then blind testing is best. However, I can make a cogent case that if I am struggling to hear modest differences then it is probably not worth my time to try and figure out that puzzle - and certainly not worth much incremental money. I doubt seriously if my preamp is the best around even to my ears and brain. However, I can guarantee u that I won’t be spending 20k to test the waters and find out. I have though been convinced that the modest bucks for Grover Huffmans Pharoah speaker cable and the nearly 2k per pair cost of the Zavfino Silver Dart interconnects is audible and worth opening up the purse strings - at least a bit. |
Ha! Do a search of AudiogoN for "Don’t Worry, Be Happy".You’ll see, it’s also been my philosophy for years. It’s simple, but liberating...
Yes, tweaking your system might also include tweaking your audio/psychological apparatus. [Just exactly how this is successfully done is, I fear, not something that might be easily found on any psychiatrist couch or in any self-help book].
------------ The Role of Psychological Factors in the Evaluation of Audio Products By: Laurence A. Borden | July 2004
"Psychologists posit that evaluation is a comparison process in which consumers: 1) hold pre-consumption expectations, 2) observe product performance and compare the performance to their expectations, 3) form confirmation or disconfirmation perceptions (did the equipment perform as expected?), and then 4) form summary judgments.
Translating this into English, and relating it to audiophilia, this means that when listeners audition a piece of gear, they: compare the sound to what they expected, decide whether the gear fails to meet, meets, or exceeds those expectations, and then arrive at conclusions about the gear."
https://www.dagogo.com/the-role-of-psychological-factors-in-the-evaluation-of-audio-products/
|
I agree with that approach. However, helping and learning is the reason i and most are here. As @jjss49 had pointed out
We seem to be in a time where differing views are not well tolerated. Some take it as an offense against their ego. Then they spend more time defending their ego than their position or POV. This often happens when someone Can't defend their statements or POV. But rather than admit their error, they try to defend their honor. At that point the discussion goes sideways and no one gains anything
|
Ha! Do a search of AudiogoN for "Don’t Worry, Be Happy".You’ll see, it’s also been my philosophy for years. It’s simple, but liberating... |
while there is wisdom in this approach, i have a bit of a different take as to what i try to do here on the a-gon discussion forum i feel this is a community of hobbyists, and as an experienced member of this community, i am happy to share my experiences if it can help others who need info or are just newer to the hobby and are not on the same point of the learning curve - and of course to continue learning more myself from other well regarded well spoken folks here as well i think the major pitfall for all those who try to contribute here is to take different views personally and take it as offensive regarding one’s own findings and beliefs... this hobby at its best brings a lot of enjoyment to those who make the effort to build nice systems, and there are so many successful approaches to doing so, not to mention so many differing tastes in what is enjoyed... trick is not to put oneself and oneself’s ego into it... |
My approach to audio these days really helps me to stay out of these arguments. it’s simple: I like the way my audio sounds. Until I don’t. And then I fix it. And I have zero expectations of persuading anyone to like what I did to make it sound they way it does. The only audience member that matters is me. it is so much less stressful. You audiogon folks should try it: the Don’t Worry Be Happy approach to fine listening
|
the longer a question exists, the more fundamental the error in the formulation of the question. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ The lack of reconciliation here, and the general kindness of the group that supports the difference in cables, as expressed toward the naysayers.. ... vs the general violence expressed by the naysayers, speaks to the understanding that the naysayer group is missing understanding, or data.... within their ideas on the totality of the data required - for the formulation of the question. Ie, that the naysayers are, generally, not in good enough psychological shape and reach to be asking the question, and the known path of substitute activity for people in such condition where questions ill formed turn to being demands, is to project and possibly act out violence. This situation of general kindness vs general violence is what we consistently see here, in these areas of clashing. |
Blind listening tests are not the ultimate, definitive final answer to which products are better. They're just the best and the most scientific means we have of comparing the sound signatures of different products. It has been long established that the human mind is subject to a great number of biases and preconceptions when it comes to forming judgements. Sometimes these biases and preconceptions can be helpful eg if you see a growling dog approach you with its fangs bared, you don't need to think very hard before taking evasive action etc. Other times they may not be so useful, eg a 50k amp MUST be better than a 1k one. Therefore since most of these biases are closely linked to sight, it makes good sense to break that link in the first instance when you are looking solely at sound quality, does it not? Blind listening tests are not perfect, nor were they ever claimed as such. However, in comparison to sighted listening tests, there is simply no comparison if you what you want is a judgement based primarily upon sound quality. For me, even the simplest blind listening test is vastly superior to any sighted one. Most of the times I've done one, I've been surprised at the results. |
Make what use you want of it. Blind A-B testing can tell you if you prefer A to B. For whatever reason. Can it make you an expert on differentiating a 2db drop at 11kHz from a 5db spike at 19kHz? Not likely. Can it help you, combined with observing measurements, using great tools, to decide if that $10k set of cables and power conditioner is worth it? Probably. Hopefully. Can it make you wise to the tendency to fool yourself in quantifying the 'differences' you think you might have heard? Most definitely. So, without slicing and dicing, ad infinitum, I just keep it simple, and recognize the usefulness and efficacy of the 'science' involved, make my decisions, and get on with the enjoyment of the music I love, with the best system I can afford. |
| Post removed |
Marvelous! Yes. And I am seriously recommending you work on your reading skills. For starters, when you see the words, "at this point" like were used above that is a clue to consider what came prior to "at this point". Next I would suggest you consider anyone can make an airtight counter-argument easy as pie provided only they are willing to disregard the actual argument in favor of one made up out of thin air. The people who study logic call this the fallacy of the straw man. You built a great big straw man. Congratulations! Now watch what happens the first little breeze comes along: https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 "That was the best the Who album has ever sounded and I’ve heard it on a lot of different systems... I mean a lot! Does that sound like "chasing my own tail"? Are all these people suffering from "expectancy bias" too? It’s hard to pick a favorite but for some reason right now it would probably be this one: "you’re a better man than me - sharing your work and discoveries and opening yourself up to ignorant comments. But thank you! I’ve learned much from you." |
Because components at a certain level, the very best ones aren’t really doing anything.Your post reveal a general misunderstanding in audio customers community... There is a fact in audio: What we listen to is not the "component" sound first and last... For sure the quality of dac,turntable,amplifier and speakers is an UNAVOIDABLE fact also with which we must compose when buying what we can afford ONLY.... Then never the best for most of us..... BUT what we listen to FIRST is the acoustical cues collected and filtered by the recording engineer, and what we listened to is delivered to ours ears by the gear but LAST TRANSLATED by the acoustical controls or lack of it in our room.... The acoustical cues of the recorded event being conveyed by the gear are RECREATED by the acoustical dimensions of our room.... We never listen to speakers, we listen to speakers/room....No piece of gear at any cost can replace acoustic laws playing between speakers/room/ears.... Ignoring that you claimed that you dont need to listen to the speakers, being Moab or anything, because " I will only hear whatever they are connected to." You are not completely right here....The speakers are not only connected to an audio system but to a room.... Then i think myself that the fundamental fact of audiophile life is acoustic treatment and more than that acoustic controls.... And anyway there is no " perfect component", contrary to what you just said, and any component add something of his own, this something added or substracted from an alleged "perfection" or imperfection can be corrected in a relative way by upgrading the system or part of it .... I chose to use acoustic controls and treatment because it is powerful and cost me peanuts....I dont need to upgrade my 500 bucks system at all and no system at any cost, most better than mine, can induce now the urge to do so for me, so powerful is Helmholtz mechanical equalization of the speakers/room (acoustic controls) ... Anyway all systems at any cost, unbeknownst to most, are acoustically limited by the room where they are and the lack of control.... I will not speak here about the 2 others embeddings controls (mechanical and electrical) because so powerful they are, they are less impactful than acoustic....Anyway they are all important.... This is a fact.....And my experience.... By the way acousticians NEVER blindfold themselves and use their ears whatever their age after cleaning it for sure ....I imitate them... 😊 My best to you..... |
If it actually sounds better or it doesn't but you think it does, all that matters is someone is happy with their purchase. Also, of course everyone's hearing and listening capabilities and appreciation is a big variable. I have found some things don't do what I was told they would, and others did WAY more than I thought possible. By making these types of changes, you learn what can impact the sound the way you want. What listening in stores CAN do is if you compare one component to another while keeping everything else (and I mean everything) the same. Optimally playing a few records you know. Stores may not be so willing to do this.... Otherwise, I've had a salesman say that he was so sure of the improvement, I could take it home and if I wasn't amazed (not happy or satisfied), I could return it for a refund (not the BS store credit nonsense). It was an arm, and it made more of a difference than upgrading the table separately keeping the new arm. He's never made that guarantee on anything else I was considering. He would say something like "I'd expect it or I am sure but I've never directly compared". Also, not willing to do the cash refund guarantee. That tells you something. |
@millercarbon, "Also at this point I came to realize it makes little sense to go and listen. Why? Because components at a certain level, the very best ones aren’t really doing anything. The perfect component does absolutely zero to make the sound good. ---- Therefore, if you find something really good and you go to listen it is only going to reveal all the other crap in the system. This is why I never bothered to go listen to Moabs even though I could have. If they are as good as I expect then I will only hear whatever they are connected to. ---- That is why for going on 15 years now I have not listened to or auditioned one single thing I have added to my system. Yet every single one of these additions has performed beyond expectations: ------- Compare this to as many reviews and user comments as possible. Along the way you get good enough reading reviews, sifting through comments, and understanding what all the various components do and how they contribute to the overall sound, that you don’t really even need to do this stuff any more." Marvelous! A fine example of self contained subjectivism, and not to mention self confessed expectancy bias, as you could ever hope to find. Outside those select reviews you agree with there’s not a single external reference point anywhere! Are you seriously recommending this ’method’ in preference to blind listening tests?? You do realise the enormous resources in time and money that you may end up in consuming in what may eventually account to little more than chasing your own tail? You do? Okay, then that’s fair enough. |
Sometimes I hear a difference when swapping components, and sometimes I do not. Sometimes the difference is obvious, sometimes it is subtle. The most difficult part is deciding if the difference is better, worse or just different, and if deemed better then deciding what I'm willing to pay for it. The one difference that blew my mind was going from a middle-tier power cord, to a upper-tier cord. It was the biggest and best difference I have heard in a long time. Who’da thunk it? |
The world's first double-blind test was performed live on television before a national audience. https://youtu.be/gbNCBVzPYak?t=56 |
Mahgister, thanks for the clarification. My bad. I’m just fed up with audiophiles who use our hobby to ... if I may be blunt ... bludgeon people into submission with their positions because their - - - - is too small. Over 53 years, I have learned how to find components and parts that work for me and to improve upon them, that bring a smile to my face, and shock the crap out of people who hear it for the first time. What else is there in this short life, other than to try to make oneself happy despite neuroticisms, and to paste smiles on other people’s faces? I really don’t care about the rest. enuf already. Jesus Mary and Joseph (Moses Abraham and David, Marx Lenin and Mao for our Jewish and communist friends ...) i don’t wish to get involved in a discussion about wire directivity unless there is a pragmatic application that is outside of our cult of audiophilism. |
Over the course of the last 30 years my thinking on this has changed and evolved considerably. From the beginning in the 70's my view was you absolutely must go and listen. Then in the 90's this evolved to you must audition in your home. Because the results I got back then seemed entirely based on being able to do home audition. When it came time for a phono stage I took this to the max, doing home auditions on at least a dozen different phono stages. Whew! But it was all worth it in the end when I wound up with a ARC PH3SE that made me happy for a good 16 years. All during those 16 years however my system continued to evolve. Everything got better. Including my review reading skills. When you get up into a very select range of components it simply is no longer practical to home audition. Also at this point I came to realize it makes little sense to go and listen. Why? Because components at a certain level, the very best ones aren't really doing anything. The perfect component does absolutely zero to make the sound good. Instead what happens is you realize a crap component can make everything crap, but a good component can do nothing to make it good again. All it can do is add zero additional crap. Therefore, if you find something really good and you go to listen it is only going to reveal all the other crap in the system. This is why I never bothered to go listen to Moabs even though I could have. If they are as good as I expect then I will only hear whatever they are connected to. Now if you follow this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion you realize that going to hear something somewhere else is at best a two-edged sword. You may have a favorable impression, or not, but either way it can be just as easily based on everything else in the system and have little or nothing to do with what you think. That is why for going on 15 years now I have not listened to or auditioned one single thing I have added to my system. Yet every single one of these additions has performed beyond expectations: Melody I880, Koetsu Black Goldline, Origin Live Conqueror, Teres Verus motor and controller, Herron VTPH2A phono stage, Townshend F1 cables, Pods, and Podiums, Tekton Moab, and a slew of others. Currently working on Raven Reflection MkIII. So today my view has evolved to this: When you are new and starting out you absolutely must go and listen to as many different things as you can. Make the stores change components. Any component. They can switch power cords, interconnects, amps, speakers- does not matter. Just make them do it. Pay attention to how the sound changes when each component is changed. Compare this to as many reviews and user comments as possible. When you gain experience try and do the same as much as you can in your own system. Bring a demo home, have friends bring stuff over, bring your stuff over to try in theirs. Try as many different things as you can. Always with the goal of becoming so advanced and skilled you no longer have hardly any need for such things. Along the way you get good enough reading reviews, sifting through comments, and understanding what all the various components do and how they contribute to the overall sound, that you don't really even need to do this stuff any more. |
Sometimes listening is not feasible, or at least blind testing in one's own environment is not feasible, so we depend on recommendations of trusted influencers or other members who are known to have good listening skills and are not corrupted or paid by manufacturers. Once we use the product, we form our own opinions. If we don't like it, we sell it. That why Audiogon is in business - Audiophiles (and stores) selling their equipment. Other sites too that don't charge for their service - they exist on advertising on their sites. |
Well I have often wondered why people would want to belong to such a clearly defined group or any group for that matter. I wonder if the naysayers have diverse political opinions or if they lean predominately to the left or right. One would think that certain psychological tendencies would trickle down into other areas of their personal lives. What I do see is a paranoid attitude which at its core involves some sort of concern over being duped. What is audio without listening and how could you base any decision on anything but listening? |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Please keep posting. It's very enlightening. |
I don’t know whether Audiogon can block IP addresses from accessing the site, maybe they cannot, but knowing this dude is tech savvy, I am pretty sure he gets around that limitation too. Using a VPN doesn't make anyone tech savvy. My dad used one and he didn't know the difference been a laptop and a typewriter. I suspect his computer knowledge is about the same as his electronics knowledge ; none. |
