my take on blind tests

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.

I think we aught to have a contest with a large "Randy" type award going to the person who can in a short period of time ID what is going on with two similar products over the entire bandwidth.

Its relatively easy to hear broad dips or bulges spread over several octaves, especially in the higher frequencies, but what about those sharp narrowband deviations. How does one pick those up in DBT tests unless someone has pointed the way? I'll miss them every time because I'm usually predisposed to hearing, or not hearing, something. I just don't pick up narrow band problems except over the long haul, especially when they are peaks. This applies to all products, not just wires & tweaks.

When I think about it, and I seldom do, I don't even know why folks care about DBT in the first place.