Why blind listening tests are flawed


This may sound like pure flame war bait - but here it is anyway. Since rebuilding my system from scratch, and auditioning everything from preamps to amps to dacs to interconnects to speaker cable etc, it seems clearer than ever.

I notice that I get easily fooled between bad and great sounding gear during blind auditions. Most would say "That should tell you that the quality of the gear is closer than you thought. Trust it".

But it's the process of blind listening tests that's causing the confusion, not a case of what I prefer to believe or justify to myself. And I think I know why it happens.

Understanding the sound of audio gear is process of accumulated memories. You can listen to say new speakers for weeks and love them until you start hearing something that bothers you until you can't stand them anymore.

Subconsciously you're building a library of impressions that continues to fill in the blanks of the overall sound. When all the holes are filled - you finally have a very clear grasp of the sonic signature. But we know that doesn't happen overnight.

This explains why many times you'll love how something sounds until you don't anymore? Anyone experience that? I have - with all 3 B&W speakers upgrades I've made in my life just to name a few.

Swapping out gear short term for blind listening tests is therefore counter productive for accurately understanding the characteristics of any particular piece or system because it causes discontinuity with impression accumulation and becomes subtractive rather than additive. Confusion becomes the guaranteed outcome instead of clarity. In fact it's a systematic unlearning of the sound characteristics as the impression accumulation is randomized. Wish I could think of a simpler way of saying that..

Ok this is getting even further out there but: Also I believe that when you're listening while looking at equipment there are certain anchors that also accumulate. You may hear a high hat that sounds shimmering and subconsciously that impression is associated with some metallic color or other visual aspect of the equipment you happen to be watching or remember.

By looking at (or even mentally picturing) your equipment over time you have an immediate association with its' sound. Sounds strange, but I've noticed this happening myself - and I have no doubt it speeds up the process of getting a peg on the overall sound character.

Obviously blind tests would void that aspect too resulting in less information rather than more for comparison.

Anyone agree with this, because I don't remember hearing this POV before. But I'm sure many others that have stated this because, of course, it happens to be true. ;
larrybou
I think what you are describing is the process of using things other than how the gear actually sounds to form an opinion of how it sounds. Once you form your opinion you then look for justification to support your views. Scientifically, this is called the power of assumptions and it is how the human brain functions on a neurological level.

An oversimplified version of your post is that if you prefer blue speakers to red speakers and in a blind test you wouldn't have that visual cue to cloud your perspective. If you think speakers are ugly you are less likely to appreciate their sound.
I don't disagree but suspect the reasons are perhaps more extensive.

I do agree that to really get to grips with new gear, you often have to listen to it over a long period of time. Music can sound different depending on our moods - I read that our ears are not passive listening devices but rather the brain continually tunes the hairs inside to adjust its sensitivity to different frequencies. The listening process involves both the brain and the ear - and is far more complex than we give it credit for.

I also read that it is only when we are relaxed, can we hear the subtle differences between gear. In most ABX tests, we are under a lot of stress and our brains are not in the same frame of mind.