2. misc-audio
  3. 1030465862

Have You Ever Put Your Golden Ears to the Test??

First let me say that I'm not one of the naysayers that Twl refers to in his thread about "Sonic Relativism", so please no attacks. I have no agenda.

I'm just curious if any of you have (or would be willing to) put your ears to the test in the way of a blind comparison. If so, what were the results? It can be quite rewarding to know that you can discern differences between things such as cables, DACs, etc.

I was at a good friend's house this weekend and we decided to do some blind comparisons of CD vs. SACD. We had three discs of various types of music (Friday Night in San Francisco, Keb' Mo and Harry Connick Jr.). I sat in the sweet spot and my friend switched discs playing one cut from each disc CD/SACD at random.

I could discern the CD from the SACD every time, but I have to say that the differences were more subtle than I expected. Of course, I'm no scientist so my methods may be open for scrutiny. I'm just curious how many of you try similar tests?

I always find it interesting when people say that they "heard" a cd player (or other component) and it was really great or really crappy or not very exciting. This almost always refers to having heard it at a dealer. How do they know they didn't "hear" the other components? What's the point of reference? The only way to really listen to components or accessories is within the confines of a "reference" system. For most of us that simply means our own system. And even then, the only way to confirm that we're hearing what we "think" we're hearing is to do some sort of blind test.

So...How many of you have put your ears to the test? If you haven't...Would you? If not...Why not?
danheather
p_mmk
70 posts
 
I have tried it. I have blind tested myself with CD players, amps, cables, etc. Sometimes I could hear a difference sometimes I couldn't. Like you said when hearing it at a dealer, things sound different. It could be the room, the gear, etc. So how can someone tell what they are hearing? When I play with gear in my own system the differences are often small, at least to me. There is another thread that is going on titled "electronics don't matter" that brings up similar issues. So I'll refer everyone who is interested to check that out.

I have to say however I take absolutes like "the best" or claims that differences are "Huge" or "Blow you away" with a grain of salt.

Paul
marakanetz's avatar
marakanetz
5,473 posts
 
SACD equipment is made the way that SACD sounds better but in reality good CD-player can do much better than SACD player so this test for golden ears as absolutely irrelevant.

If you ask me if I ever put my golden ears to the test I would say no since I have no golden ears. I only have my own made up from drum acceptors with a-little hair grown and flexible tissue shell covered by tan skin.
newbee
4,794 posts
 
how exactly would you conduct a blind test? in my listening room? i have no problem detecting differences in any equipment i use, good or bad i'm not predisposed, but in an unfamilar environment there would be just too much new information to process, at least for me, and that is how i see most blind tests conducted and i consider those worthless.
bomarc
501 posts
 
Setting up a truly objective blind test (one that eliminates all of the biases that scientists claim are inherent in sighted comparisons) is not a trivial matter. Plus, you need at least a smattering of statistics training to properly interpret the results. That makes true blind testing a nonstarter for most audiophiles. And this being just a hobby, there's no need for that kind of rigor.

One important thing to remember is that blind tests can prove there's a difference, but they cannot prove that there isn't, or that you can't hear one. That's a basic law of statistics. (On the other hand, if you do a whole lot of blind tests that come up negative, the evidence does start to point in a certain direction...)

That said, if you're interested in the limits of what humans can and cannot hear, and why blind testing is essential in determining this, you should pick up a basic text in psychoacoustics. Used, older editions can be had cheaply, and it might save you some money on audio gear.
danheather OP
108 posts
 
Good point Newbee. There has to be a "reference". You must be listening to equipment that you're familiar with in an environment with which you're also familiar. I would tend to agree that "double-blind" testing performed by people who don't even know what they're listening for (Twl pointed this out elsewhere) is flawed at best and completely worthless.

What I'm referring to is conducting your own "in-home" blind testing where there is a point of reference and, hopefully, some relatively skilled ears listening for the most subtle of contrasts.

I've listened pretty extensively to my friend's system (almost as much as my own!) so I'm comfortable with using it as a reference. Additionally, my friend doesn't make nearly as many changes to his system as I do, so it's been pretty constant for a long time.

P_mmk also raises a good point about people make hyperbolic claims such as "the best" or "blows you away". I have heard people say such things about SACD which was one of the reasons that I wanted to conduct our informal test. While there was certainly a difference, it was not as obvious as I would have hoped.

Imagine the reaction people had to color television when it came out. Cable vs rabbit ears. Digital cable/satellite vs analog. DVD vs VHS. HDTV vs conventional broadcast. In the visual medium the changes are more obvious.

Ours is a hobby of incrementalism. This is all the more reason that we should be training our ears. It's easy to say that I hear a difference, but harder to prove. I'm not suggesting that I need to prove it to somebody else. I want to prove it to myself.
More to discover