You are right for sure...
Blind test is most used in the pharma business among others industry...There it is easy to understand why it is very important tool and testing drugs methodology ... Statistical method and blind testing goes hand in hand here...
But in audio if even singular non statistically significant blind test in some case yes can be useful, CLAIMING it must be used systematically on people to DECONSTRUCT their CONTINUOUS experience in meaningless bits is bordering ridiculous when "measuring tool fetichist" warring against "brand name testing subjective fetichist " called it "science"...
Audio is a science where A CORRELATION between subjective experience being maintained must be accounted for with objective tools and methods yes, but not systematically deconstructed by ideological claims...Audio experience is more encompassing than audio industry itself , it is not primarily about gear and tools it is about acoustic/psycho-acoustic and sound/speech/music scientific relation...
Acoustic/psycho-acoustic first and last are sciences in audio with electronic engineering between these two moments of A/P.A...Blind test is a secondary tool at best here, not a primary concern like some fetichist claim for their weak argument about audio which is : We listen and can really listen ONLY what is measured or explained by some set of measures...The rest is deceptive fraud or illusions...
Subjective Perception of tonal timbre for example may be tested by blind test usefully but not negated in itself to exist OBJECTIVELY with the utmost value even if it is a subjective determination... Some people are better than other at this task of timbre tonal perception for sure....Subjective evaluation controlled and correlated with and by objective means is the heart of music/sound experience and science but the reverse is ALSO true, objective means and tools must be subordinated also to the subjective evaluation itself , it is a true TWO WAY correlation process ...Not an ideology...
Hearing is not even understood completely by far today...
It is very revelatory that the two warring fetichist groups battle each other AROUND the gear, focusing on the gear MARKET, and not around acoustic/psycho-acoustic experiments and experience in audio thread...
And like A.I. promotion in some circle is used AGAINST human real INTELIGENCE , which is conceptual creation, in audio digital industry some want and claim to redefine human hearing experience WITHOUT the need for a human subject....
This is not science in the two cases but ideological groups inside true science...
Welcome to you here by the way....
Hello,
not much discussion here about statistics... well, it’s not an exciting subject really.
I thought the point of blind testing was the sample size. One person is not enough, maybe you need more than 100. If more than, say, 60% of them opted for A you might be able to say that A is better than B, and if it’s 50/50 then that’s a pretty good indication that A and B are close to the same thing. I would venture that when only one person attempts AB you will not get conclusive results unless one of A or B is truly terrible.
It’s hard to get 100 audiophiles into the same room, and you would need good security to prevent fights breaking out.