2. misc-audio
  3. 1147409526

do blind tests have any practical significance

do the results of a blind or double tests have any usefulness ?

a blind ab test does not prove anything. it only states facts, namely that a certain percentage of listeners were able to distinguish the sound of one component from another.

there are many issues as to the validity of these tests.

the question, "can a listener detect the sonic difference(s) between components", is never answered definitely by one test.

suppose a blind test is administered 10 or more times to the same group of listeners. assuming the first test is replicated 9 more times, there is a chance that there may be an inconsistency between the outcomes of the test.

suppose a statistically significant percentage, say less than 60 percent, for a large sample of listeners, identifies differences between 2 components, what does that mean ?

what is the application of such a result for a prospective buyer of a component ?
mrtennis
pawlowski6132
592 posts
 
"Either something sounds good, or it doesn't..."

Correct, however, referring to my example, I will never know if these amps really sound good or not because SK is NOT giving an objective observation. Her predjudices and impartiality are clouding the review. Period. How can anyone dispute this????? She even comes right out and tells you.

I'm not questioning her integrity. She probably has lots. Or maybe none. I don't know and I don't purport to.

I'm commenting on the process which most reviewers are subject to.
cdc
1,810 posts
 
Sammie Davis Junior was good in single blind tests, however my vote would be for Stevie Wonder in double blind tests.
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
So should magazines hire writers who have no preconceived notions about a product? Do you want to read a review written by someone who does indeed live in a vacuum???

How can someone without years of listening experience write a review??? You have sunk below the level of absurd...

:o
pawlowski6132
592 posts
 
Nrchy; You're missing the point. Sue can continue to review. Just don't tell her what's she's listening to. That's not absurd at all. Just say, Sue, you'll be listening to a solid state amp in your system. Tell us what you think.

I'm not sure how we keep missing each other on this. Doesn't this make sense?
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
I don't think you understand the process involved in working for a magazine, or reviewing a piece of gear...

The reviewer lives alone, and has to take possession of the amps, get them into place, hook them up, andthen conduct a review. It is impossible for her not to know what is being reviewed. Reviewers don't go off to some magic island named vacuum and sit there for a few weeks to do their job. This is a part-time, supposedly fun (if you call getting reamed out by every audiophile who disagrees, fun) job for people who are otherwise gainfully employed.

You're right, it doesn't make any sense...

:o
More to discover