do blind tests have any practical significance

How about an alternative to the blind test; the nearly blind or poorly sighted test where all participants are required to have poor eye sight and must turn their glasses or contacts in before listening. This would be a politically correct compromise between the totally blind objective test and the totally sighted subjective test.

i have been thinking about this question for a while.

i had forgotten that i initiated this thread, months ago.

i think the important question is: does one prefer component "a" over component "b".

an interesting answer to this question would be to perform 2 tests. the first test would consist of comparing the components without being aware of the brand names. the second test would be identical, except that the names of the components would be revealed prior to the comparison. presumably, several months would elapse between the 2 tests.

the conditions of the test, such as sources, duration of exposure, manner of substituting one component for another, etc., could be determined by a committee of "wise men".

the question is, is there a placebo or "mind over matter" or prejudgment effect of being told what components are being compared , such that the results of the tests would be different ?

In medicine and in science in general the ONLY kind of test considered reliable is a double-blind test. Should listening tests of audio equipment be different? Perhaps it should because the "data" is completely subjective. But this means that the test results are completely useless, so why bother? Go listen.

Science has no place in our hobby. We know what we know and we don't need no book learnin'.

Edartford, if the evaluation is completely subjective and therefore useless, why bother reading any reviews at all??