Blindfold Speaker testing

This will never happen.Good luck with that.

I have absolutely no idea what the OP is trying to say.  Does it have a point?

So the point source was 1 speaker(1 box)r vs 2 boxes of the other brands playing a mono recording?

If that's the case, doesn't surprise me. 

erik_squires

I have absolutely no idea what the OP is trying to say.

Me neither. It's as though it's written in some odd code.

I believe it's a transcription of a wish-fulfilment dream, remembered rather hazily.

Mozartfan discovered hi-fidelity on youtube using his headphones and now cannot believe he didnt realize that his headphones are point source as well.

How the blindfold test will go in reality:
  
https://youtu.be/I2KkglP-cac?t=2

Now I know what speaker to avoid. 
A Voxativ.

I'm not sure if this is close to what the OP is referring to, but acoustic engineer, Floyd Toole has already performed blind tests at the Harman facilities in the LA area. 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/blind-listening-harman-international

So, question: for this guy to do the blindfold test, would he wear a blindfold? Or gloves? https://youtu.be/sNrcb-9Gi8c?t=49

Some speakers don't sound their best from behind curtains.

Let’s do it! How are we going to fund it?

Some speakers don't sound their best from behind curtains.

You are joking, right. ya gotta be jokin

You guys are all drunk, right?

I think it’s a design of experiment sobriety test… how about we blindfold test between 6 pairs of vixatives, or whatever….

tomic6018,315 posts06-24-2021 9:46pmI think it’s a design of experiment sobriety test… how about we blindfold test between 6 pairs of vixatives, or whatever…

Yeah We could do some AER's, and Vox's Neo magnets + their Field Coils,, 
back in the 70's we had a  local shop which had a  room packed with speakers, 
i chose the 
Philips 2 way, High Fidelity, Wsh I had gone with the 3 way. 
Next to the Thors they sounded anemic,. 
The Thors sounded anemic next to various cheap chinese *full range/point source*,,and so its likea  shootout, Last speaker standing wins.
Yeah WE could do that. 
We test, judge and kick out the losers, til we get down to the final shootout. 
We all have to come to a consenus. 
Midrange, testing based only on midrange fq.s not bass, nor highs. 
I can get high fidelity in those fq's with no problem, Lots of good choices.
Its the midrange we are judging. 
If you look at the  fq chart for the Vox, its flat and no harsh  peaks and valleys. 
= You get all the music, with no distortion, 
Troels stays busy trying to tame the midrange with all sorts of xover components
YUCKKKK, 
can't stand xovers in midrange,. 
I am not going to purcahse the Vox for bass/highs, 
If they are there, well its a bonus. I am employing the high sens only for midrange, 1200hz=-10k.
From what I've read this area is where this driver really shines. 
So finally my dream sound is not long off, 
Been searching some 40 years. 
Its was only last year that i was made aware of what these Point Source are all about. 
The Ebay seller wrote back on one of my many Q's
**ohh no my speakers are not copies of Fostex or Lowther, we are cloning The Voxativ*. 
huh?
Whats that?
He went on to say, *My Top speaker is like 80% what a Vox is**,,, I thought,, no must be at least 90%*. Its most likely 80%, , china can  not copy that technology.  Sure  his top line are  only $500, so if your budget is tight, its  good deal. 
But its not what I am after. 
I am looking for The Real Deal. 

Well that is 5 min I will never get back.  

Same.

I've been under the impression that 'blind tests' are truly That....one goes into the routine with minimal knowledge of what items are being compared, with the exception of one 'given' item.
In this purposed scenario: an amp, the 'common element'....

One can 'get obsessive', and argue "Well, what's 'upstream of said amp?", but since the object is speakers...define the 'norm' and move on...

NO list of speakers.  Screw that.  That skews the responses from Sample One.  Stunts like an unknown used on multiple 'unknowns' R. Gray apparently pulled are flawed....'Carney tricks', pulled on the 'marks'....

Everything should be 'known', except for 'X', to test for 'X'.
Even then, 'X' needs to be 'rated' over the variables sought...for speakers, define what's being sought to prove, illuminate, define....etc.

A pointless exercise, otherwise...

Millers' movie clip demonstrates such....a stupid movie, overall, but apt...

And once you get any of the 5 speakers home, it will sound different in your room. The test is pointless. The true test is how the speaker will sound in your own room. 

mozartfan-

Do you know about genetic and non-genetic variation among individuals? This variability requires a much larger sample size to produce any meaningful outcome.

Again, an individual's central and peripheral auditory system is the largest variable in any such test - something that many engineers apparently will never understand. It  may be that Elon Musk's Neuralink(R) will provide a direct link between amplifier output and medial orbitofrontal cortex.

So what we know is that he is proposing a gimmick, a stunt, or a prank. Seems pretty definitive that is just a side show and not anything resembling a legitimate test.

trained listening

https://www.pooraudiophile.com/2015/07/blind-audio-testing-the-scientific-truth-behind-the-myth.html

Again, an individual's central and peripheral auditory system is the largest variable in any such test

My tech geek believes audiophiles at least most, need their hearing tested, 
It was only when I had the Seas Millennium tweet on one channel a  point source on the other channel, fliped back and forth did I make the realiztion dome tweeters are dinasuars, 
The Millennium completely totally rolls off the highs,  so whats left are the mids, which sound like a  wet blanket has been thrown over the speaker.

No one really knows just how bad their speakers perform/sound until they compare them to a  quality high sensitivity speaker. 
Til then   we all think the world of our speakers. 
Troel's speakers, being the worlds best, can't match a  single high sens driver, not from say 1khz-12khz. 
As I say I have no expectations a  high sens single driver will be the Be All End All. 
I already have bass and tweeter. 
I only need the most critical driver, midrange. 
The only driver that I know which exists that can voice high fidelty for full orchestra is a  high sens Full Range, 
This has been my mantra past 6 months. 
Each day this realiztion becomes more clear and focused.
If the new tech is avaliable at a  very affordable price where anyone is able to access.
Why reject it?? 
Makes no sense.
I've been searching off/on past 40 years for a  high fidelity speaker. 
And finally  my research has paid off.
If you don't seek, you'll never find. 
Its just not going to drop out the sky. 
And I should thank a few here , mentioning the new Full Range drivers. 
This design is not popular here On Audiogon, I accept that. 
As to the whys, I have no clue.
Old dogs can't learn new tricks. 

So what? Been done decades ago. Nothing new under the sun.

The curtain will ruin the sound unfortunately. 

@mozartfan     Anyone who has plugged earphones into a system that contains a Dynaco 70 amp and thinks it is an Audio Research amp is clearly deaf.

I have, and you can modify the Dynaco 70 any way you want and I guarantee you anyone can tell the difference between it and an Audio Research product.

In fact, I did just that in 1976 with an AR Dual 51 and a Dynaco 70 and a pair of STAX headphones.  (I actually did that with every piece of gear in the shop as the the STAX, while amazingly bright and harsh, were almost as revealing as the Sennheiser's of the day, which I also listened to this way.)

It was all part of my education as a young, know-it-all dealer (HA!), which included playing my Strat and Precision and Bundy cornet and other instruments live and then listening to recordings through every piece of gear in the shop.

This took me many months and many repeats, but I finally learned what reproduced sound could be and what it was not.

Tricks like blind A-B things are just tricks.  As we proved over and over, and was supported by pretty much every "audio guru" of the time, there is really no way to do scientific A-B testing due to the differences in all the items in the circuit.  Best to just take some stuff home TO YOUR ROOM and listen there to find what YOU like IN YOUR ROOM rather than pay attention to all the advertising and "measurements."

I was a successful high-end dealer because I not only educated myself, but also enabled my clients to pick WHAT THEY LIKED rather than what I knew was more accurate.

To this day, ANYONE who does not audition an item IN THEIR ROOM may make an error in judgement that they will regret.  We all like different things or there would only be one manufacturer of each part of the music reproduction system, right?

Cheers!

What is wrong with his question?  All you need to do is blind fold the listener and remove the curtain.  This would be a great experiment.

A real waste of time. Is the room the right size for all these speakers to perform properly. Each pair of speakers will need to be set up properly. An example Klipsch K-Horns need to be in the corners. Speakers are all flawed and need special attention on how to display them. What needs to be done is to have one pair of speakers at a time properly setup and then make the evaluation. Lining them up behind a curtain side by side is a dumb idea. By the way who the hell is Richard Gray. He needs to get a life.

Mozartfan, I love the idea!  My understanding is that Revel does something similar at their headquarters in California.  However, I would recommend the following:  ditch the curtain idea and actually blindfold all of the seasoned audiophile judges involved; have them all submit to audiological testing to control for hearing acuity; control for the sweet spot and vary that to test for off-axis performance of all of the speakers involved and hire a pit crew that can change those speakers out as fast as an Indianapolis 500 pit crew can change tires on those Indy cars.  That would offer a bit better control or objectivity.  However, there is still the factor of controlling for best component matching and room acoustics variables.  The only way I can think of, of going about something like that would be to do all of the above and, then, put the judges on some sort of moveable floor that can be transported from optimized system & room to another.  Now, how would you control for individual music preferences?  Different strokes for different folks.  Variety is the spice of life!

This might end up getting filed under ’Audiophiles and their fear of the blind listening test.’

Somehow a gossamer thin curtain, or a blindfold, or even turning off the lights seems to induce a sense of mild panic amongst certain folk that has them running for more substantial cover.

Cognitive dissonance?

Surely anyone that goes to a dealer to audition a loudspeaker could only benefit from having to having to rely entirely upon their ears?

Why are the eyes such an important crutch to some when judging sonics?

Why are some of us so frightened of the OPs interesting challenge?

This is no pushover test, there’s some seriously big hitters amongst the contenders suggested ("Walsh, Wilson, Tannoy, and 2 others which are very popular, like Joseph with the Seas and 1 more")

So are Voxativ drivers really that good?

Is Richard Gray a charlatan, or an iconoclast or even a dangerous threat?

If so, then to whom?

Why don’t we at least try to find out some of the answers?

Surely we may have nothing to lose here but our preconceptions?

CD318, "Cognitive Dissonance"?  Really?  Do you even know what that really means or did you look that one up in your Thesaurus?  Is that where the CD handle comes from?  "Preconceptions"?

Lighten up, man!  This is supposed to be fun!  I've got absolutely nothing against blind-testing and I don't think most folks, including audiophiles, do.  I'd love to be able to do that sort of thing with audiophile components or just in general!  It would be fun and interesting to read about tests like this with all sorts of audiophile equipment.

I really hope mozartfan is joking and a troll.

He's just a single driver fan boy who sounds like he bought a pair and wants everyone to agree with his purchase, which he's having grave doubts about. 

Is buyers remorse the opposite of expectation bias, and usually the outcome?

Also, it's sad to see all the advocates of blind listening tests come out of the woodwork, on command, after all the discussions disproving the efficacy of it. Zombies.

All the best,
Nonoise

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a blind test. The only variable can be the speaker playing. It is much harder than lining up speakers behind a curtain and playing them one after another. The volume level must be matched, the speakers placed in the same position, and the listener position controlled. There are other variables to control as well. Otherwise, the "test" is nothing more than a gimmick, a stunt, or a prank as the OP has so correctly called it previously in this thread. The sort of test described in the OP proves absolutely nothing.

Why are some of us so frightened of the OPs interesting challenge?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I understand that many old faithful audiophiles just can not let go the old xover/box designs. Its been a  part of our lives these past decades, its worked for me, so why the need to change. Trust me a  high sens new tech driver  will present music completely, totally different from what your past experiences have told you is *the right way, the only way* to isten to music.
I'v since jumped ship on xovers in midrange.
One you experienced a  full range in mids, you'll never want to go back to box things. 
FR speakers somehow threaten to turn their audiophile world upside down. 
Look  back in Chicago, 1929, some USA lab figured out  how to present music witha  Field Coil, which offer mids that surpass anything comming out of Seas and scanspeak's lab. 
All due to the higher sensitivty, Why should we  continue to ignore the old tech which was  indeed successful, but long negleced, and now has risen from the dead  in a  New 21st C technology???
Beats me  why the fear. 
Just embrace it. 

The volume level must be matched,

~~~~
Absoluetly not, Vol stays the same, See here is where xovers completely fall apart in mid section, a HUGE  fq section it is.
Sure it will bea  dead giveaway when a  higher FR sens driver comes in to play.
Everyone will know,,ok, speaker C and F were  the FR models .
THis is the point of the testing, to revedal the obvious weaknesses inherent in the xover things in the mid fq.s
A weakness I never want again in my system. 
The  cheap 4 incg FR I am now using in place of the Seas Millennium,  is close to acceptable. = Beat out  the finest tweeter from Seas. At  less than 1/3rd the price. 

Mozart, some of use have been playing with wideband drivers for decades (a decade for me). They are excellent at many things, and bad at many things as well.

" I’ve spent months looking at every Seas driver, trying to make something up,"
you can spend years "looking" at drivers. proof is in the pudding, in person audition. same with all those youtube videos you refer that "proved" to you that wideband are the secret audio sauce, you need to start listening to those wideband and live with these for a couple of months before making any final judgments. 

Look go read all the raves on the Vox, AER, You can not find even 1 miniscule complaint of these speakers, except the price. 
Whereas how long/ how much has  the xover things been hyped these past decades.
And you know exactly what I am talking about.
I once thought the world of my Seas Thors,
Often I stated the Millennium was indeed the finest tweeter in the world. 
Then came along these various cheap chinese FR things. 
Now dome tweeters were exposed for their weaknesses, blantant, obvious, hyped. 

The volume level must be matched,

~~~~
Absoluetly not, Vol stays the same

At least you admit it is a gimmick and not a true test. It has been proven by people willing to put the work into performing a proper test that listeners almost universally prefer the sound when it is louder in such a test. Not better or more accurate......louder. IOW, you could take any speaker and play it at 80 db. Then, while behind the curtain pretend to hook up a different set of speakers while leaving the same pair hooked up. Just turn the volume up to 82 db. Most will prefer "speaker B" even though it is the same speaker. The test you describe is never about trying to prove that one is better than the other. It is about, "Hey, I can trick these people". And you fell for it. LMAO

No
The point of this excercise is to show how inefficient = read INEffective,,are the box xover things we all grew up with and is now longgg past time to leave those boom boxes behind.
Xovers will be shown, proved to be ~~flawed~ designs.

The very few Audiogon members who do  own AER and Vox are sitting on the sidelines, just reading these posts , and having a good laugh.
They well know what they have, which is a shame.
They ought to speak out as having owned neverly every loud speaker and now have settled on the high sens as their ultimate listening experience.
High sens owners are like a small closed niche, a Exclusive Club.
They pop in and make a few comments and pooof, gone .
For some reason they do not like to hang around here on Audiogon.
I guess they feel, why argue, why belabor the issue.
The xover group will never come over to FR and the High Sens will never ever go back to xovers.
And a wide gap separates the 2 camps forever.
There is no middle ground.

"They pop in and make a few comments and pooof, gone ."
something i hope you aspire to do

It is the Emperor's new clothes all over again.

Who wants to look the fool ?

This is why most "Experts" will tell you blind testing is meaningless.

Just remember "Everybody plays the fool sometimes..."
No exception to the rule.

That said I'm game!!!