2. tech-talk
  3. 1421262840

In defense of ABX testing

We Audiophiles need to get ourselves out of the stoneage, reject mythology, and say goodbye to superstition. Especially the reviewers, who do us a disservice by endlessly writing articles claiming the latest tweak or gadget revolutionized the sound of their system. Likewise, any reviewer who claims that ABX testing is not applicable to high end audio needs to find a new career path. Like anything, there is a right way and many wrong ways. Hail Science!

Here's an interesting thread on the hydrogenaudio website:

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=108062

This caught my eye in particular:

"The problem with sighted evaluations is very visible in consumer high end audio, where all sorts of very poorly trained listeners claim that they have heard differences that, in technical terms are impossibly small or non existent.

The corresponding problem is that blind tests deal with this problem of false positives very effectively, but can easily produce false negatives."
psag

Showing 1 response by electroslacker

electroslacker
375 posts
 
Granted, sighted tests produce false positives, but I would posit that stereo equipment exists to create pleasure in the brain, much like the role of cigarettes. This pleasure can be difficult to capture in the conscious mind, and does not lend itself to discernment, comparing, and "telling." When I smoked, there was no conscious altering of state. I could not say, "I am under the influence of nicotine." I could not say, "This cigarette is better nicotine." The brain just liked nicotine, and cigarettes were a delivery mechanism.

If you removed nicotine from one pack of cigarettes and not the other, and asked me to discern between the two packs, I don't believe I could, but then is the discernment between which cigarette is which really the measure of the related pleasure? If I kept the two packs for a couple of days, I would most likely want more of the pack with nicotine, but I would have a heck of a time telling you why. My failure to discern could lead an observer to conclude that my love of one pack was an illusion.

Why couldn't there be a similar behavior in the pleasure of music delivered through various devices? Why couldn't the brain-level pleasure of music be as difficult to discern as nicotine? "I smoked AmpX and AmpY, and really couldn't 'tell' the difference, but I listen to AmpX three hours a day."
More to discover