my take on blind tests


ABX tests shows that there are no difference between cables. However, many of us would disagree. I took similar test and must admit that I had problems with hearing the difference.

And then it came to me. There is a difference between listenig and hearing.

Even if there are no differences in sound we can hear them because we are listenig. Listening is paying attention to the whole experience and not only to allow our ears to enter the sound.

Bottom line is, if you hear the difference when you see which cable is on and hear no difference when you cannot see, let it be.

We pay for the whole experience, not sound waves alone.

What do you guys think?
sebastian_bik
"The only other time they hired someone young was Bernstein. So I can't be the only person who heard it."

This is much harder to accomplish via dbt.
Actually orchestras do blind testing. Not in the case of conductors, but most major orchestras do blind open auditions of musicians applying to fill a full time rank and file position. They play behind a partition. The judges cannot see who it is. They have to vote solely on what they heard.
there are two errors in listening: fialing to hear what is present and hearing what isn't there.

what is needed is replication, numerous times, to try to eliminate or reveal these errors.

in the end, if a person is satisfied with the performance of a stereo system after changing a component, all "tests" are irrelevant.
Who cares at this stage about the much maligned DBTs? Hell, I would settle for a bit more method and objectivity on the part of audiophiles in assessing equipment, but, unfortunately, that is sadly lacking, since the most outrageous claims are believed to be the most valid ones. Woe is to anyone who honestly declares not to hear any difference.
Post removed