I think Stereophile's listening before the Carver match was sighted (ie not only with ears). Only after he matched the amps was some blind testing done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Carver#Amplifier_modeling
https://www.bobcarvercorp.com/carver-challenge
https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge-page-2
If I'm right that the pre-matched listening wasn't controlled, this test would only fail to reject the null hypothesis that the *matched* amplifiers were audibly indistinguishable. It says nothing about strictly audible differences between the *unmatched* amps. An objectivist would probably suggest that Carver had the edge even before he modified his amp.
The null testing Carver employed to match amps has been used to compare expensive and generic cables right out of the box, with generally inaudible results.
But I remain interested in any *ears only* (blind) testing that rejects the null hypothesis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Carver#Amplifier_modeling
https://www.bobcarvercorp.com/carver-challenge
https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge-page-2
If I'm right that the pre-matched listening wasn't controlled, this test would only fail to reject the null hypothesis that the *matched* amplifiers were audibly indistinguishable. It says nothing about strictly audible differences between the *unmatched* amps. An objectivist would probably suggest that Carver had the edge even before he modified his amp.
The null testing Carver employed to match amps has been used to compare expensive and generic cables right out of the box, with generally inaudible results.
But I remain interested in any *ears only* (blind) testing that rejects the null hypothesis.