2. cables
  3. 166355-2693

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

Because it was scientifically proven to be useless more than 60 years ago.

A speech scientist by the name of Irwin Pollack have conducted an experiment in the early 1950s. In a blind ABX listening test, he asked people to distinguish minimal pairs of consonants (like “r” and “l”, or “t” and “p”).

He found out that listeners had no problem telling these consonants apart when they were played back immediately one after the other. But as he increased the pause between the playbacks, the listener’s ability to distinguish between them diminished. Once the time separating the sounds exceeded 10-15 milliseconds (approximately 1/100th of a second), people had a really hard time telling obviously different sounds apart. Their answers became statistically no better than a random guess.

If you are interested in the science of these things, here’s a nice summary:

Categorical and noncategorical modes of speech perception along the voicing continuum

Since then, the experiment was repeated many times (last major update in 2000, Reliability of a dichotic consonant-vowel pairs task using an ABX procedure.)

So reliably recognizing the difference between similar sounds in an ABX environment is impossible. 15ms playback gap, and the listener’s guess becomes no better than random. This happens because humans don't have any meaningful waveform memory. We cannot exactly recall the sound itself, and rely on various mental models for comparison. It takes time and effort to develop these models, thus making us really bad at playing "spot the sonic difference right now and here" game.

Also, please note that the experimenters were using the sounds of speech. Human ears have significantly better resolution and discrimination in the speech spectrum. If a comparison method is not working well with speech, it would not work at all with music.

So the “double blind testing” crowd is worshiping an ABX protocol that was scientifically proven more than 60 years ago to be completely unsuitable for telling similar sounds apart. And they insist all the other methods are “unscientific.”

The irony seems to be lost on them.

Why do so many audiophiles reject blind testing of audio components? - Quora
128x128artemus_5
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
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??

Yes. And I am seriously recommending you work on your reading skills. For starters, when you see the words, "at this point" like were used above that is a clue to consider what came prior to "at this point". Next I would suggest you consider anyone can make an airtight counter-argument easy as pie provided only they are willing to disregard the actual argument in favor of one made up out of thin air. The people who study logic call this the fallacy of the straw man.

You built a great big straw man. Congratulations! Now watch what happens the first little breeze comes along:

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367

"That was the best the Who album has ever sounded and I’ve heard it on a lot of different systems... I mean a lot!

That spot, the listening chair is a very special place that went beyond just listening to music. Great job creating a near religious experience."

"you’re a better man than me - sharing your work and discoveries and opening yourself up to ignorant comments. But thank you! I’ve learned much from you."

"Suffice it to say, it was the biggest, most powerful musical experience I’ve ever experienced in a home setting."

"WOW ! Is all I have to say. I don’t see anything out of place, in this system . Well thought out."

"The imaging was so good that I felt like the vocalist was performing right in front of me and that I could reach out and touch them."


Does that sound like "chasing my own tail"? Are all these people suffering from "expectancy bias" too?

It’s hard to pick a favorite but for some reason right now it would probably be this one:

"you’re a better man than me - sharing your work and discoveries and opening yourself up to ignorant comments. But thank you! I’ve learned much from you."

Post removed 
laughingrabbit's avatar
laughingrabbit
13 posts
 

Make what use you want of it. Blind A-B testing can tell you if you prefer A to B. For whatever reason. Can it make you an expert on differentiating a 2db drop at 11kHz from a 5db spike at 19kHz? Not likely. Can it help you, combined with observing measurements, using great tools, to decide if that $10k set of cables and power conditioner is worth it? Probably. Hopefully. Can it make you wise to the tendency to fool yourself in quantifying the 'differences' you think you might have heard? Most definitely. So, without slicing and dicing, ad infinitum, I just keep it simple, and recognize the usefulness and efficacy of the 'science' involved, make my decisions, and get on with the enjoyment of the music I love, with the best system I can afford.

stereo5's avatar
stereo5
6,385 posts
 

This is the same old BS I have been hearing about blind testing, double blind testing, etc for the past 50+ years.  Nothing new here and what I did read was quite boring. 

cd318
2,636 posts
 

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.

More to discover