Clever Little Clock - high-end audio insanity?

Audioaril, If the listening room is built deep enough underground, the geothermal energy should keep it at about 55 degrees Fahrenheit. According to Belt's principles that should improve the sonics without the use of any fossil fuels. However, if one doesn't mind using fossil fuels, a room-size commercial freezer can be installed in the house as the high-end listening room. With the listener himself/herself in the freezer, it won't be necessary to put the photographs in the freezer.

Audioaril,
Two important conditions are missing in your list. The challenger should be allowed to familiarize himself/herself with the sound of the dealer's high-end system prior to the start of the 10 trials. He/she needs to sort out what sonic characteristics are due to the unfamiliar room and equipment; and which are due to his/her own cable. Also, the challenger should have the right to choose which track on his/her CD is to be used in the test. Presumably, a track that has a variety of sonic parameters will offer a greater opportunity for the two wires to be differentiated. John

audioaril,

"For some reason, rapid A/B switching doesn't allow the brain to make adjustments quickly enough."

Perhaps, there is an analogous phenomenon for aural experience that exists for our visual experience. Namely, if you look at a colorful object for a while and then close your eyes, you see an "after-image" of the complimentary color that lingers for a while. While it lingers, the after-image color interacts and mixes with your subsequent visual experience (with eyes open). The brain is not able to instantaneously wipe itself clean between two sucessive visual experiences. I have two paintings that demonstrate this phenonon dramatically. Anyone who has looked at them for a few seconds reports the same thing: colors blend, new colors and forms emerge and there is movement of the nebulous forms. If our brain reacts in a similar dynamic way to aural experience, that may explain in part why rapid A/B switching is not an appropriate methodology to testing audio components. If the "after-image" of A lingers in the brain and mixes with the experience of B, we may get a more homogeneous result that clouds differences.

Zaikesman, Most analogies break down when analyzed at fine enough detail. Your interpretation of my analogy took it further than what I intended. I suggested the limits of my analogy by the last sentence of my post above. If the brain does not instantaneously wipe itself clean after each experience, then what remains is what I refer to as the "after-image". As in the case of the visual experience, the after-image is subtle enough not to incapacitate one's functioning within a constantly changing environment (as your comments suggest), but may be enough to cloud subtle subjective experiences. Most of us have had the experience of a song or a tune being 'burnt-in' into our brain that "we can't get it out of our mind". Even such a stronger "after-image" doesn't disable our ability to function. Perhaps some neuro-biologist reading this thread could shed some light.

Zaikesman,

"I agree that quick A/B's often don't reveal nearly as much as there is to hear."

None of the threads on Audiogon that I read, including this one, or the Stereophile article on DB testing contain an explanation for your statement that is supported by scientific data. Until some neurobiologist/psychologist becomes interested enough to devise an illuminating experiment, we can only conjecture.

"The solution in my experience is not to throw away A/B's altogether, it's to keep doing them until the finer differences emerge, which they do if you have the determination and patience."

I agree with your solution! Perhaps (Oh,Oh. Another conjecture is coming up.), repeated A/Bing results in the formation of new neuronal connnections or the strengthening of weak ones that facilitate the discrimination of finer differences that were perhaps (!) previously masked by "after-images":-)

Zaikesman, Given your clarification, I believe we are now on the same page, or at least close to it. My posts above refer to quick A/Bs that involve rapid switching as is the case in some double blind tests. Repeated short-term A/B tests in which you have at least a few minutes with each option are extremely important to delineate the differences. I have performed hundreds of such tests while refining my audio system. During these short-term tests, my powers of discrimination and analysis usually play a primary role and my affective nature a secondary one (unless the difference that emerges involves feeling). However, after this analysis is somewhat definitive, I do long-term testing (leave a component in a few days and then remove) in which the roles are usually switched: enjoyment level and feeling become primary while analysis takes a back seat.