I see the issue with ABX blind testing

@mahgister Always talking about acoustics, he is right and I say that with a unique perspective making recording all over the world and listing to my own recording all over the world.

I greatly appreciate your feedback on my own experience . I dont have yours in all the world studios then i am way less credible than you are ...

But you certainly can imagine that 2 years full time in a dedicated homemade acoustical room with hundred of experiments along basic acoustics concepts convince me of what you just said in the rest of your posts...

Most people cannot do what i have done because it takes a room your wife will never enter into 😁... And so much time that it had been full time reading, thinking , tinkering 2 years being retired...

Now i learned enough to be cured of gear upgrade audiophilia...

thanks for your kind word ...

2) You wrote there are 7 PCs but it was not 7 PCs. Some were just repeat. It’s like a trap and bring a confusion.

ABX implies that you listen to A, then B and then X which will be either A or B. Paul McGowan of PS Audio is of the same opinion that you are, he doesn't like the X part of ABX as he feels that he's being tricked. But it's not meant to trick you,  it's meant to discern whether you  can actually distinguish the difference between A & B and identify them when you don't know which you're listening to. If, after hearing A & B you can't tell which thing X represents that's a pretty good indication that they are indistinguishable.

I'm content with where I've ended up  on  this journey & you sound like you are too. We can part as friends & move on.

I'm content with where I've ended up  on  this journey & you sound like you are too. We can part as friends & move on.

I wrote a trap (bit offensive) in my defense. This thread has been a joy to me. I learned few lessons and I like this topic very much with many knowledgeable participants. Cheers. Alex/WTA

The problem with the X part is that we distinguish sound qualities differences by our unconscious body feeling not by conscious remembering .We felt a change we do not always perceive it clearly. we will perceive it more clearly by changing some acoustics parameters in the room or the gear. ..

The double blind ABX   test cannot be successful nor useful  out of our usual sound environment including our system/room  anyway ...

What is indistinguishable in some environment is distinguishable in our own .

You cannot do that by double blind testing with ABX method at all ...

The x part will introduce a conscious interference ( a suspicion and a self doubt the stress of being tricked ) that will impede your relaxed spontaneous body feeling continous reaction in each acoustics  continuous parameters change when you adjust and tune an Helmholtz resonator mechanically for example as i did. ...

The goal is not a circus test , or an industrial statistical test on a hearing population but the goal is for you improving in an incremental but continuous way your own acoustic environment ...You cannot do it and felt compelled to prove it at each minor improvement... It is preposterous... Only people with no psychoacoustics understanding can propose that or people in the business of debunking gear marketing... Like objectivist techno cultist... 😊

Simple blind test is useful and enough for any individual audiophile.

2) You wrote there are 7 PCs but it was not 7 PCs. Some were just repeat. It’s like a trap and bring a confusion.

ABX implies that you listen to A, then B and then X which will be either A or B. Paul McGowan of PS Audio is of the same opinion that you are, he doesn’t like the X part of ABX as he feels that he’s being tricked.

@mahgister I do not - I have been involved in blind ABX testing in audio and in science.

How the Brain Fills in the Blanks | Psychology Today

Your brain is filling the blanks. Don’t believe us? Try this… - COVE | Center of Visual Expertise (covectr.com)

There is more information out there, just like this. Our brain doesn’t change what it does because we say it is audio.