Why Do So Many Audiophiles Reject Blind Testing Of Audio Components?

What are subjectivists most scared of?
Someone turning the lights off.
The mere thought of just relying upon their ears causes untold palpitations.
Graphs, charts, spinorama and other data are all equally taboo.
Thus the high priests of subjectivism have decreed from time immemorial (circa 1976?).

Blind listening tests are not the ultimate, definitive final answer to which products are better.

They're just the best and the most scientific means we have of comparing the sound signatures of different products.

It has been long established that the human mind is subject to a great number of biases and preconceptions when it comes to forming judgements.

Sometimes these biases and preconceptions can be helpful eg if you see a growling dog approach you with its fangs bared, you don't need to think very hard before taking evasive action etc.

Other times they may not be so useful, eg a 50k amp MUST be better than a 1k one.

Therefore since most of these biases are closely linked to sight, it makes good sense to break that link in the first instance when you are looking solely at sound quality, does it not?

Blind listening tests are not perfect, nor were they ever claimed as such.

However, in comparison to sighted listening tests, there is simply no comparison if you what you want is a judgement based primarily upon sound quality.

For me, even the simplest blind listening test is vastly superior to any sighted one. Most of the times I've done one, I've been surprised at the results.

@millercarbon,

"Also at this point I came to realize it makes little sense to go and listen.

Why?

Because components at a certain level, the very best ones aren’t really doing anything.

The perfect component does absolutely zero to make the sound good.

----

Therefore, if you find something really good and you go to listen it is only going to reveal all the other crap in the system.

This is why I never bothered to go listen to Moabs even though I could have. If they are as good as I expect then I will only hear whatever they are connected to.

----

That is why for going on 15 years now I have not listened to or auditioned one single thing I have added to my system.

Yet every single one of these additions has performed beyond expectations:

-------

Compare this to as many reviews and user comments as possible.

Along the way you get good enough reading reviews, sifting through comments, and understanding what all the various components do and how they contribute to the overall sound, that you don’t really even need to do this stuff any more."




Marvelous!

A fine example of self contained subjectivism, and not to mention self confessed expectancy bias, as you could ever hope to find.

Outside those select reviews you agree with there’s not a single external reference point anywhere!

Are you seriously recommending this ’method’ in preference to blind listening tests??

You do realise the enormous resources in time and money that you may end up in consuming in what may eventually account to little more than chasing your own tail?

You do?

Okay, then that’s fair enough.

@reubent

@big_greg

"When you meet a new person can you look at them for a few seconds and determine how they compare to the last person you met, or does it take time for their true nature and character to reveal itself?

For me, it’s the same with audio components.

It takes time to get to know them."

 

Fair enough, if you believe there might be parallels between comparing a human being with an electronic device - I can't fathom certain human beings even after knowing them for decades but that's another story - but what about those who went around espousing "night and day" differences, yet dare not risk undertaking a blind listening test between a $10 DAC and one costing 100 times as much?

Let’s not forget that human perception evolved primarily to detect differences, which often meant danger. It’s something we’re very good at.

Therefore if it really does take several days/ weeks to identify a sonic difference, which might only be due to a subtle anomaly in frequency response, then just how important could it be anyway?

Furthermore, wouldn’t such delicate differences between frequency response will inevitably suit some material/systems and not others?

In fact you could argue that when the detection of extremely marginal differences (which may well be down to manufacturing tolerances) takes such a long period of time how can we be sure that it’s not our mood/attitude that is actually changing instead of any increase in our perception?

You can bet that the equipment on test will always be slitkre consistent than the human being doing the testing by ears alone.

It’s quite one thing to say I love product X, it’s better built, has better backup service, but entirely another to say it’s clearly sonically better than product Y.

Sonic differences are, I suspect, easily the most important factor when it comes to purchasing new equipment. Audiophiles change equipment in an attempt to upgrade their sound.

I can’t see any reason why us consumers would have a problem with blind listening tests when auditioning potential upgrades. Money and sonic satisfaction are very important to most of us, aren’t they?

So perhaps we should also ask that why is it primarily manufacturers, dealers and reviewers that have an issue with blind listening tests? Instead of embracing an additional way of evaluation, some them seem to be quite hostile.

 

Reviewers/shills/ad men/hacks/sales reps etc seem to be particularly cowardly/defensive/guarded/silent when it comes to reviewing blind.

In fact I know not of a single one that would risk their ’reputation’ in this way.

Not one.

Why is this?

Perhaps their fear of destroying their entire retail business model by revealing the emperor’s new clothes syndrome is real enough.

It should be easy enough to arrange for most, but can you imagine any dealer offering the facilities for prospective customers to listen blind?

Me neither.

@astolfor

"...his father almost gave him a spank and asked if I knew or I was being me curious so he told me that short memory key in finding the right lenses, because the short memory comparison is key"

 

Thanks for sharing that interesting post.

Short term memory comparison does seem to make a lot of sense whenever we have to rely upon our senses. Everytime I look at a picture or a scene and then close my eyes to visualise it, I’m always a little disappointed to find upon opening my eyes once more just how much detail and nuance had faded so fast.

As for autism, unfortunately it still seems to be a mysterious condition, even in 2022.

Best of luck to you.