Amir and Blind Testing
Let me start by saying I like watching Amir from ASR, so please let’s not get harsh or the thread will be deleted. Many times, Amir has noted that when we’re inserting a new component in our system, our brains go into (to paraphrase) “analytical mode” and we start hearing imaginary improvements. He has reiterated this many times, saying that when he switched to an expensive cable he heard improvements, but when he switched back to the cheap one, he also heard improvements because the brain switches from “music enjoyment mode” to “analytical mode.” Following this logic, which I agree with, wouldn’t blind testing, or any A/B testing be compromised because our brains are always in analytical mode and therefore feeding us inaccurate data? Seems to me you need to relax for a few hours at least and listen to a variety of music before your brain can accurately assess whether something is an actual improvement. Perhaps A/B testing is a strawman argument, because the human brain is not a spectrum analyzer. We are too affected by our biases to come up with any valid data. Maybe.
No, it's not placebo. A placebo effect is short lived, leaving a dead patient. Placebo effect is the lousiest of analogies to use. If someone still enjoys what they're hearing over the long run, it's because it sounds good to them and is the antithesis of the"placebo effect". In fact, it reinforces the view that long term listening is the deciding factor. All the best, |
@nonoise , Can you point to any scientific papers that validate your hypothesis? I have a strange past time. I strive to make the perfect cola syrup (preferably diet, but that is whole different ball of wax). We all have our vices. One of the many amateurs posted a blind taste test he did, absolutely convinced Coke was his personal Gold Standard. It would be the obvious best to him out of about 12 if my memory serves. Decades of drinking Coke, and he didn't pick it out of a lineup as best. His preference, when everything but taste was taken out of the equation was Pepsi. Even though he had been conditioned for Coke. I am sure there is a similar wine story, but I choose not to learn too much about wine lest it remove the pleasure of a bottle of good plonk. In my mind, my Pepsi story negates your audio listening hypothesis. |
The two of you are right and wrong together and at the same time...
There is always a placebo effect and a nocebo effect at play... For sure it is so.... We all are played by our expectation biases...Then my pepsi is your coke and vice versa....This is a common place fact in life and in science too...
But when this is said, all acoustic cues contributing to every acoustic factors exist objectively, they can be implemented and put in place with objective ratios between surfaces,volumes, various acoustic material content and various devices... In the sound experience there is expectation biases and placebos, but what i listen to from my speakers/room emerge MOSTLY from my ability to control the room too or from my unability to do so...Not from my expectation biases...But from my acoustic knowledge and experiments...
Then explaining everything by expectation bias dont usually means much... "Measuring tools fetichists" tend to negate any value to the expectation bias of the " subjective gear tasting fetichists"... And debates goes without end because they argued about the GEAR and they dont know HOW TO MODIFY AT WILL ALL ACOUSTICAL CUES contributing to the main acoustic factors and experiences in their room ... The two main opposing groups of fetichist focus their attention on the gear pieces, one group subjectively, the other objectively...They ignore acoustic and psycho-acoustic or treat it like a secondary factor but it is the main one... Acoustic/psycho acoustic is the science correlationg subjective and objective dispositions, ratios, and devices... Buying an upgrade and plugging it in the wall with or without an objective measures set is SECONDARY business for the ultimate sound/music quality experience...Not the main business...
Acoustic is the sleeping princess and all pieces of gear are the 7 working dwarves, and the kissing prince is the psycho acoustic factor.... 😁😊
There is also with the acoustic embeddings controls , the vibration/resonance mechanical control and the control over the electrical noise floor of the sysyem/room/house... These three embedding controls are the KEY of a good sound experience not decimals about different piece of gear so important measures are for the design of a good piece of gear... Is it not simple? It is incredible that most people argue without end ignoring this three factors to audiophile perception and debating subjectively or objectively about a piece of gear... All audio magazine are marketing sellers points not science , and almost useless to create our sonic heaven... It is not exagerated too much if i say so....By the way it is not because someone use technological tool that it is de facto science... Science need concepts not only tools...In audio the concepts come first and last from acoustic... Anybody can buy a good basic piece of gear but knowing how to embed this working piece of gear in his mechanical, electrical and acoustical environment is the KEY... i learn it the hard way... And listening is not a placebo journey in deception, it is something we must learn, not by comparing various pieces of gear and calling our favorite brand name product the winner, but by training ourself in acoustic control : bass, timbre perception, dynamic, imaging, soundstage, LEV/ASW ratio, etc....
|
