Why Do So Many Audiophiles Reject Blind Testing Of Audio Components?

@mahgister:

Room/gear/ears synergy is another factors
...
This is the reason why we choose gear by listening it for practical reason

But you can't listen to everything. Heck, there's very little you can listen to in a comparative environment nowadays. And that environment isn't like your own either. So you need a filter to narrow down the selection. And that's where Harman's research comes in. And if you have a goofy room, you need to understand how acoustics works to consider things like directivity, diffusion and absorption. Otherwise, most speakers will likely not sound very good.

As for room, you could always duplicate Harman's room. I inadvertently designed my new media room to almost the exact same proportions. Here's Harman's.
Length 9.14 m
Width 6.58 m
Height 2.59 m

The AES and IEC also has standards for domestic listening rooms. Also, I found this paper to be informational when designing a listening room.

But you can’t listen to everything

Where i live i cannot listen to anything new...

I choose my pieces of gear after studying many hundred reviews for some years...

It was a complete success...I like all my gear....

And that environment isn’t like your own either. So you need a filter to narrow down the selection. And that’s where Harman’s research comes in. And if you have a goofy room,

I cannot build a room after Harman and few people could.... It is NOT an affordable solution for most people and it is not even necessary...

And if you have a goofy room, you need to understand how acoustics works to consider things like directivity, diffusion and absorption. Otherwise, most speakers will likely not sound very good.

There is a more economical and very powerful better solution...

I used material passive homemade treatment in my 13 feet square not ideal room at all, with speakers on a desk and one speaker almost between the walls corner... A balance between absorbtion, reflection and diffusive surfaces is needed...

But it is never ENOUGH anyway in almost all cases, not only for my case...

I created then a "mechanical equalizer" with a grid of 32 tubes and pipes with various volume/ neck lenght ratios orientable and adjustable at will, by cutting different type of straws in section of different diameters...

I distributed all that around reflection points in my room beginning with one speaker and ending with the other speaker... Asymmetrical volumes for each tubes and pipes near the direct wavefront of each speaker is very important...I use for the "head" speaker tubes near the tweeter only and for the other near the bass driver only...All other tubes and pipes of different volumes located at my right and left on reflection point and behind me....

Contrary to an electronic equalizer that modify the frequency response of the speakers to the room, mechanical equalizer modify the room in relation to the speakers and act by their continuous action, buoying and marking out for each ear the reflections of each speaker differently, making the brain able to create a better localization of the sound...I dont use precise frequency response of the speaker with a mic. but my ears listening to different instrumental timbre for the tuning...

Contrary to an electronic equalizer that work ONLY for a precise unique location in millimeter out of which all fine tuning run amok, the mechanical equalizer work with a relatively large bandwith (voice timbre) then for ALL the room....i listen at the end in near-listening and regular position without being able to choose which one is better...Contrary to an erroneous affirmation in audio thread near listening is greatly affected by room controls in a small room...

Now with my experience here, give me any relatively good speakers and any small room, and i can make them a wedding in heaven...It will cost only time a month of listening experiments and no money...

The secret is simple, controlling the timing of the early and late reflections and the back reflections to create a 3-d holography ....

Also using the Helmholtz tubes and pipes to fine tune the instrumental timbre experience in a more natural one because we modufy the pressure zones of the room when we place the H.R. tubes all along the room......

For sure it is not possible to create such a grid in a living room...

For me the most important luxury in audio are not the gear at all...Any relatively good gear can do what i wanted to...

It is a dedicated room which is the only necessary luxury....

Acoustic physical law are not enough and material passive treatment tell only HALF of the story.... Psychoacoustical law are necessary for the most important half , with the Helmholtz mechanical equalization ....I can control, imaging, timbre, soundstage, listener envelopment and source width at will...No electronic preocessing is needed at all contrary to what most people think even specialist...

By the way all that was made with discarded materials from my basement and cost me nothing at all....

Acoustic give audiophile experience more efficiently than costly gear only.... My audio system cost used under 500 bucks but it is a well choosen one ....I will never feel the urge to upgrade anymore.... Too busy immersed in music...I never read reviews of gear anymore....So powerful is acoustic control in ANY room even in a non Harman one...

Understand me right here: i am not like those who boast to have the better gear in the world.... My system is NOT the best by far, but the ratio S.Q. /price is over the roof....

Then i smile when people boast about gear without knowing acoustic....The audio market condition our mind  to BUY it is simple....The audio market dont educate people about acoustic and some other basic control like vibrations and electrical  noise floor...

Fine tuning a room is exactly like fine tuning a piano: it is the SAME THING....

No piano tuner need to be blind tested....And no piano tuner ask for it because they doubt what they listen to...

Then blindtest disccusion are a comedy.....

@jssmith    
Doesn’t surprise me to hear that was their findings.

Would think that the most familiar “sounds” coming from speakers would be the ones people would connect to. Wonder if they were “civilians” in the tests?

@perkri: I've read Harman uses both trained employees and trained and untrained civilians. I remember reading that they also did sighted and blind tests with their own engineers and, as expected, the sighted tests had completely different results. 

Here is a short blog post by Sean Olive saying that four speakers were tested by hundreds of untrained listeners.

Most of the information about their procedures and results can be found in his blog posts. And some by reading Toole's book.

I don't own any Harman products except a $180 pair of studio monitors for my computer that I only use to play guitar through, just in case anyone might think I'm a Harman zealot.

I don't own any Harman products either but I recognize the importance of those tests. I think since the time they were conducted and now there are speaker manufacturers who are influenced by them at least in the pro market.