Hi, Dan. I'm glad that someone else is thinking about this. First, I have done blind listening tests on many occasions, particularly at the audio store I used to work at. When business was slow, we would do that for fun, just to see if we could tell what equipment was being played. But the way we did it, we remained blindfolded while an entire system was set up and played for us. We then would try to indentify every piece in the system without ever looking at it. Many times we were successful with every component. When only one component was changed in a known system, it was no contest, and we quickly tired of that easy game.Ok, so we were very familiar with the sounds or the stuff we sold. Fine, but we could tell the difference blindfolded. So, yes I have done it, and yes I could do it.
I don't believe however, that blind testing is the only or even the best way to determine listening differences. When you make a change, or especially a tweak, you don't know which way it is going to go. You cannot possibly assign a mental value to the change. So this idea of the vision of equipment making imaginary sonic changes is at best some form of unvalidated conjecture. You just listen and you tell if there is a difference or, not. Simple. It is empirical.
And, I am not opposed to the simple act of blind testing, if that is what you want to do. But I am opposed to the incorrect supposition that it will lead to some kind of "fact" that there is really no difference in the sound of equipment. And that all this is just "in our heads". That is where I am coming from.
