I see the issue with ABX blind testing

Pshshsh, who conflates a deer hunt with the OP topic - wild goose chase - anyway!? 😉

dwcda

04-11-2024 7:25am

There is no way my brain is retaining what I previously heard and then comparing it to what I currently hear.

@dwcda correct. And this has been demonstrated to take less time than many audio gurus assume. If comparisons are not a literal flip-switch, subjects can be quick to lose, alter or invent, context. A “trust your ears” stance is necessarily deaf to this ubiquitous limitation, and I think that’s fine so long as the choice is not professed to be useful for everyone’s case.

The alternative is to connect all of the new cables, listen for a week or so & then switch back & see if you feel you’re missing anything. But then your brain takes over & your biases will have as much impact as any potential change in sound quality.

That’s not an alternative, it’s a totally different (and perhaps even less-controlled) test that will probably give inconclusive results. The second part, you’re surely accurate.

So I’m stumped as to how to proceed.

There are options, but they require designs using repeated measures and those won’t do well with a sample size of one (listener). By virtue of how such comparisons have to work to be analytically robust, one person listening for preference differences is a non-starter.

Situations like these, some folks will decide on alternative assessments that aren’t controlled. And for some folks, that’s good enough (and again, I agree fine, if they’re not processing it to be suitable as a rule). If one cable or three cables or all cables make a difference to your perception, whatever kinds of tests you have or have not done, the query for you is: How much difference should be perceived for said device(s) to be worthy of inclusion / purchase?

soix

8,549 posts

04-11-2024 at 08:24pm

 

“And this has been demonstrated to take less time than many audio gurus assume. If comparisons are not a literal flip-switch, subjects can be quick to lose, alter or invent, context. A “trust your ears” stance is necessarily deaf to this ubiquitous limitation, and I think that’s fine so long as the choice is not professed to be useful for everyone’s case.”

 

@benanders Lots of things have been “demonstrated” one way or another but doesn’t make something “ubiquitous.” I’ve heard consistent differences manually switching between many cables and did not need instantaneous switching to hear it, and these difference were consistent, clear, and repeatable. Some people, apparently like yourself, don’t possess the ability to do this so can’t trust their own ears, but it’s a very useful method for those of us who can.

Heyya @soix certain biological “limitations” in human hearing x associated cognitive functions certainly have demonstrated ubiquity. Despite that, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with you or anyone else trusting your respective perceptions in music kit. Professing those perceptions to be “consistent, clear, and repeatable” for others is, however, either in honest error or purposefully misleading. You need a proper assessment to claim broad applicability of perception(s), and typing disparaging speculation about someone’s hearing and/or audio kit doesn’t supplant that need, no matter how many times you do the latter. 😉

audphile1

4,068 posts

04-11-2024 at 09:19pm

 

@soix your arguments are falling on deaf ears.

@audphile1 WHAT??

soix

8,553 posts

04-12-2024 at 08:46pm 

“Professing those perceptions to be “consistent, clear, and repeatable” for others is, however, either in honest error or purposefully misleading.”

@benanders So, you’re saying I’m not hearing what I’m hearing despite hearing it consistently after multiple back-and-forth comparisons?  

That’s definitely not what I “said,” @soix  . Demonstrable difference and perceived difference are not necessarily the same thing. If cables aren’t being demonstrated to have difference (whether through properly arranged listener pref studies or measurements or some option I’m unaware of), then there’s no evidence to support a perception of difference. That doesn’t mean something perceived as being different is not real. It simply means there’s insufficient reason to assume it would apply in any other situation, since so many other variables will change at the same time.

It’s really sad some people need studies to tell them what they can and can’t hear.  

Well, I tend to think it keeps some things more predictable and interesting. Emotions like sorrow tend to get in the way of objectivity. 😉

I’d submit it’s misleading (and arrogant) for you to maintain that using your ears is an error and misleading based on some study somewhere.  

Again, no one here has suggested that. What works for you works for you. But professing what you perceive should apply to others’ perceptions and/or use cases? Better off having some evidence.

Pretty sure most people here have been able to discern differences between two products,

Absolutely. As aforementioned, can be demonstrable or can be perceived (or can be both), so can be real or can be imagined (cannot be both); this gets muddled when some folks who don’t consider the discrepancies discuss everything they perceive as though it were demonstrable (= evidentially supported).

So like I said, whether or not it’s intentional, that style of presentation can be misleading.

but I guess you need to be told what you can hear rather than being able to objectively judge something for yourself.  Sad.  Deaf ears indeed.

soix

8,560 posts

04-13-2024 at 08:40pm

“What works for you works for you. But professing what you perceive should apply to others’ perceptions and/or use cases? Better off having some evidence.”

@benanders Yeah, and if a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his ass a hoppin’. Back in the real world and in most cases there is limited or no “evidence,” especially with something like cables.

@soix evidence for / against cable differences - that cable manufacturers don’t seem to hold consumer preference studies seems like a strange knowledge gap to maintain, IMO. Critical parameters for cables in aerospace and military purposes show minimal to no measurable difference in what almost any HiFi setup would use. But let’s set aside such measurements since admittedly they’re of limited relevance for music listening purposes if not closely aligned with consumer preference studies.

I mean, that’s why we’re here — to give others an indication of something they might or might not want to audition or try, not to profess as you say that our perceptions will necessarily be the same as theirs, but indications can still be very useful and helpful despite the inherent variability.

You previously stated you surmise anyone who cannot hear differences that you perceive in cables, to have compromised hearing and/or equipment; that sure seems like professing to me. I’m unclear which stance you actually hold since it couldn’t very well be both, could it?

(BTW, when I said I can hear differences that are clear, consistent, and repeatable I was saying for me — not necessarily others — in response to your assertion based on some study somewhere that people’s aural memory is crap and you need a flip switch to reliably discern differences — I again say hogwash to that.)

Well, that’s your prerogative @soix . Rigorous objective studies on our biological capacities and limitations tend to hold up among scientific panels and courtrooms, but admittedly Internet personalities can think of them whatever they want, whether or not they’ve reviewed the material.

dwcda OP

8 posts

04-15-2024 at 08:35am

@mihorn I listened to that on my system & heard no difference between any of the 4. So I had my spouse choose the part to play while I had no idea which she was playing & I could not tell if she was playing different pieces or just the same one again & again. So no difference for me.

Is it just me? Has anyone listened to those 4 recordings and heard differences?

@dwcda YouTube compresses sound files so there’s potential for argument. However, I’d expect any compression effects would be independent of cables. Multiple other reasons why YouTube clips could be problematic for comparisons like this, but I’ll try to give a listen later. Thanks @mihorn for making the effort.

soix

8,565 posts

04-15-2024 at 12:43pm 
…

@benanders You took this out of context. 

…

@soix , understood. Thank you for your clarifications.

The drain-circling that purported cable audibility causes could be avoidable.

…

A fellow HiFi guru says “I perceive no difference”, well, that poor soul doesn’t have sufficiently well-trained ears and/or resolving enough kit to cut it.

A musician says “I perceive no difference”, well, that player’s instrumental experience is too narrow.

A conductor / music theory prof says “I perceive no difference”, well, live music and stereo playback are two different things, so that maestro’s comparing apples to oranges.

A studio recorder/mixer/masterer says “I perceive no difference”, well, HiFi components that reproduce those recordings somehow reignite sonic elements lost or masked by gear-inattentive negligence of those techs who made said files.

Then another forum avatar types “I do perceive difference…”, and no experience or credentials need be forthcoming: that fella understands! The anecdote rolls into a collective mindset convinced of reality despite lacking enough general curiosity to rigorously test it.
Being curious about how things work and being obsessive about a things-fixation are not necessarily the same obstacle. The first setting can be proficient with objectivity (using appropriate assessments). The second setting can tend to think it masters objectivity (despite perhaps avoiding appropriate assessments).

And yes, anyone who swears cables are audible components and got upset by the term “snake oil” or someone insisting no difference could possibly exist, that’s the same tendency using different words, guised in an analogous package of pseudoscience. The two polarized mindsets can be much more alike than some folks seem to recognize.

I really like the tv analogy @jetter - well-chosen!

soix

8,621 posts

04-20-2024 at 10:13pm 

@benanders Your post is as slanted as it is ineffective in its stated upfront point…

Heyya @soix , was your reply chat GPT-generated? It missed the point of my hypotheticals (= people sometimes perceive what they “want” to, so it’s dubious that audiophiles’ hearing isn’t prone to known human limitations). Oh well, maybe that’s on my writing.

Im not sure I’m clear on how you meant me to interpret the term “measurement” as you applied it in your rebuttal. Seems you haven’t further interest, and that’s fine; otherwise you’re free to read on.

@audphile1 that video - strong effort, some audiophiles heed no limits (respect!), except respecting (uh oh, I sense a ‘but’…) the importance of sample size for study of behavior / perception. YouTubers and forum-goers continuing to avoid / dismiss a properly controlled sampling of human listeners for inquiries like this is not in line with methodological reality of how factual info is demonstrated. Is that tendency really due to some audiophiles’ assumption of (1) needing to be skilled / trained at listening to components, or just that (2) they might be inexperienced / untrained about how experiments must be structured? Maybe both are at play?

I respectfully remain doubtful. Not for insisting whether there could be audible differences, but for some audiophiles persistently assuming properly controlled studies haven’t relevance for comparison in hifi. 

That is the common ground x Achilles heel of (1) most / all subjective listening tests and (2) most studies based on device-derived measurements (many lack properly controlled listener preference assessments with which to correlate conclusions). It’s a two-part equation but each “camp” keeps assessing one side only, from what I can tell. Whatever happened to A, B, C it’s easy as 1, 2, 3? As simple as… Doh!

Hence my stance these discrepancies could be resolved.

audphile1

4,147 posts

04-22-2024 at 12:45pm
…I had no intention to use it to prove anything to you or others in the cable denying camp. That is a fool’s errand.

I think there lies the rub, @audphile1 - I’m not denying anything (I haven’t formally tested for it short of some blind swapping of some on-hand types). I’m reiterating the need for demonstration (of it being more than a placebo).
I know it seems like petty semantics, but it’s an important discrepancy between what can be known (fact with supportive evidence for / against), vs. what is assumed but stated as fact (present state of things).

As soon as one robust, properly controlled study is undertaken and shows a significant number of participants perceived difference between two or more types of cable, the stance of “no difference possible” will be disproven, or at least shaken.

Nothing gets proven in science. Disproof is how the process is works.

audphile1 4,150 posts

04-22-2024 at 08:40pm

@benanders …

“I’m not denying anything (I haven’t formally tested for it
…”

this further solidifies what I said above. So here’s the rub…I do not need my entire zip code to hear the changes in my system and nod their heads in approval before I finalize any purchase be it cables, streamers, dacs, etc. The only element that matters to me is what I hear and how much of an improvement there is. There were multiple instances where I had sent cables back. Cables that I had actually high hopes for they just didn’t work out. The change was so negative that I couldn’t endure listening to my system for more than few minutes before getting severe fatigue. These were high priced cables and no, they were not defective.
Do you think I would keep these cables if I had 50 people telling me they like the sound? Absolutely not.

And this, my friend, is where the discussion ends. Please let me know when you get around to trying some cables as an experiment in a comfort of your home and system, and what you had heard.

Well, that’s what I was getting at re: perceiving what one “wants,” @audphile1 - you plucked one sentence, chopped off the second half to change its meaning, then added a false narrative to make my statement contradictory. Odd if not uncommon behavior. Doesn’t warrant my effort to reconstruct what I hoped to convey. Sigh. I keep curious why folks who perceive sighted differences in their audio kit don’t aim to be more interested in uncovering whether it’s the kit or their brains as the source of perceived differences. To me, it’s just seems a weird thing to avoid. Obsessive minds can definitely be objective, and those folks tend to be very interesting (IMO); to be obsessive but only within the lanes of one’s own selective constraints for inquiry is fine, but it might not teach anyone much other than a suite of untransferable personal opinions (and if/when those are worded in factual tone, I’d say that can be an info QC issue).

However, your mistaking my (lack of) formal testing for my (routinely performed) blind ABX’ing suggests an important knowledge gap, and as you don’t seem to wanna close it, I agree a good signal to end convo. All good, no hard feelings. 😊

tonywinga 804 posts

04-23-2024 at 02:52am

... Drive through ATM‘s all have Braille on their keypads.

Why is that?

ATM’s are likely designed / manufactured to a keypad standard shared by both drive-through and walk-up units.