2. misc-audio
  3. 147670-20253

Blind Testing is Dead - Long live My Wallet testing.

Hi Everyone,

I was seeing some discussions around cables, and reading other discussions about A'gon members asking for opinions on different alternatives for hooking up a DAC, or TV sound, or whatever, and it made me think of this.


I want to tie a few things together:

  • Most technical measurements consumers read were defined by the 1970s. It is fair to describe them as stagnant.
  • The cost to benefit ratio of a lot of products can vary a great deal.
  • I hear things I can't yet measure in cables and crossover components.
  • I like measurements. 
  • Someday measurements commonly discussed among consumers will improve and better tie our values to technology.

A lot has been made about double blind testing, and a lot of readers rely on taste masters (web sites, magazines and social media) and whether in fact these taste masters can hear anything at all. Reminds me a lot of blind testing of wines, or an article I read recently about how much super rare whiskey is fake.


When deciding on a bit of kit, I could not care less about double blind testing. I care about :

  • What audible value can I perceive?
  • Is the price proportional to that value?
  • Is my money better spent on a vacation or liquor?

We should also note that I'm a bit of an iconoclast. Most consumers also care about:

  • Brand recognition
  • Style
  • Perception of modernity (is it cutting edge no one else has)
  • Perception of construction (how much does it weigh, how is it packaged)
  • Ability to create envy.
  • Price ( if it's too inexpensive, it can't be good! )


What is my message then? My message is that this is all cute, like reading about movies or books or music shows, but in the end, it's my wallet, no one else's. John Atkinson is not buying my speakers for me. I am. My hard work creates value which I use some of (sometimes too much) to buy audio related products. The more you detach yourself from brands, costs and worries about measurements the more frugal, and happier  you will be.


Best,

Erik


erik_squires
cd318
2,636 posts
 
@blindjim, "but there is only one way to note the influence or input of any device within an audio system and that is to know the system itself prior to exchanging ANY facet within it.

otherwise, the only known value of any outfit which can be remarked upon sanely will be the system’s loud speakers."

Many already believe that loudspeakers are where virtually all sound quality differences can be easily found. Easy to hear differences 24 hours a day, 365 days a year by anyone with an interest in audio or not. No golden ears required whatsoever.

Hence there's little interest in blind testing for amplifiers, CD players, cables, DACs etc because they are practically undetectable by the acutest scientific measuring devices, let alone a human ear.

Other mechanical transducers such as turntables, arms, cartridges, and headphones on the other hand do still have easily demonstrable differences in sound quality whether tested blind or sighted.

In time these too will diminish no doubt. Already a good $300 headphone is awfully close to $3000 one. 

There should be no need to be afraid of blind testing unless of course it's true that high end audio all too often likes to dress up in the emperors new clothes.



erik_squires OP
16,058 posts
 
Can any of my readers imagine a world where we double blind test a T-shirt, or a car?

That's also part of what's going wrong here. :)


At the same time, are some cables and accessories over priced for their technical merit? Sure, but let me show you my watches. My most accurate is a Seiko solar / quartz, but it is by no means the most expensive I own.

Best,
E
mikexxyz
66 posts
 

Eric: I often see references to high end watches as an analog to hifi. I don’t think it applies for the following reasons.

1) High end watches are a pure luxury item and the manufacturers know that. As you mentioned, $12K Rolex makes no claim to have better accuracy than a $35 Casio. They have other features that make them collectable (in house movements, unique complications, unique style) but they are inferior to the Casio in their core function.

2) A lot of high end audio is also pure luxury. They understand that as well but do not overtly market it as a life style product but make the claim that their product is superior in function to their Casio counterparts.

3) High end watch collectors are usually informed buyers. High end audio buyers, not so much.


Mike


erik_squires OP
16,058 posts
 
If they are adding 30 lbs of aluminum to a product, it’s overtly marketed as a luxury item. :)

3) High end watch collectors are usually informed buyers. High end audio buyers, not so much.

I call BS. I think it’s the same mix. Those who buy a brand for the brand and those who geek on the movements.
mikexxyz
66 posts
 
I agree that there is no difference between those that buy an audio product or a watch merely for brand recognition.  My point is that there are folks that buy a $50K amp and then try to tell you how much better it sounds.
More to discover