The only reason double blind tests exist is so naysayers and non-believers can say, “I bet it can’t pass a blind test.” Obviously any test is fraught with all manner of complications and error so you can’t really say a single blind test has any real significance, especially if the results are negative.
Is there actually a difference?
Speakers sound different - that is very obvious. But I’ve never experienced a drastic change between amps. Disclaimer that I’ve never personally ABX tested any extremely high end gear.
With all these articles claiming every other budget amp is a "giant killer", I’ve been wondering if there has ever been blind tests done with amplifiers to see if human ears can consistently tell the difference. You can swear to yourself that they do sound different, but the mind is a powerful thing, and you can never be sure unless it’s a truly blind test.
One step further - even IF we actually can tell the difference and we can distinguish a certain amp 7/10 times under extreme scrutiny, is it really worth the thousands you are shelling out to get that nearly-imperceivable .01% increase in performance?
Not looking to stir up any heated debate. I’ve been in audio for several years now and have always thought about this.
With all these articles claiming every other budget amp is a "giant killer", I’ve been wondering if there has ever been blind tests done with amplifiers to see if human ears can consistently tell the difference. You can swear to yourself that they do sound different, but the mind is a powerful thing, and you can never be sure unless it’s a truly blind test.
One step further - even IF we actually can tell the difference and we can distinguish a certain amp 7/10 times under extreme scrutiny, is it really worth the thousands you are shelling out to get that nearly-imperceivable .01% increase in performance?
Not looking to stir up any heated debate. I’ve been in audio for several years now and have always thought about this.