I see the issue with ABX blind testing

@soix Sorry you feel that way. I am a trained scientist and I know how skewed our internal system is. As I said, it is part and parcel of our survival mechanism. I do not trust ’golden ears’ because they are just as biased as the rest of us and as you age, hearing degrades, period.

The point being is that blind testing, if done right takes out all that bias out, however small it is.

I would say, it is the golden ears ones that are scared to find out all the massive expensive cables are just that, massive and expensive. When they say, ’aka people who can’t or haven’t developed the ability to use/trust their own ears’ I am done with the discussion as arrogance rules the day.

Hey, if you don’t like fungi, don’t eat mushrooms. drink Tokai or Sauternes, drink saki, eat blue cheese, use soy sauce/miso or many other naturally fermented products.

As I said, I am out of this discussion. Enjoy all.

botrytis

... When they say, ’aka people who can’t or haven’t developed the ability to use/trust their own ears’ I am done with the discussion as arrogance rules the day ...

You've proven your point admirably well.

Testing hearings ability in some conditions is not the same as testing cables in some others conditions...

Accusation of "golden ears" are stupid. Each ears /brain perceive differently in his own hearing environment with his own systems...This is a scientifically proven fact in musical and speech acoustics...

Denying the validity or the usefulness of blind testing is also stupid. But there is difference between using simple blind test in my home as i did in my acoustics experiments and training  and using ABX DBT on statistical chosen population and using it to demonstrate as in a circus run by techno cultists some audiophile claims...😁

All that is conflated as "science" ... This conflation is preposterous...

This is why most cables debates are useless, there is too much factors and parameters meaningful in many fields and those who discussed are biased as : cables dont make a difference and cables makes powerful differences. Which neither claim is true because it is related to very different possible factors at play...

The less useful discussion are about cables...

The more useful one are about acoustics concepts ( not mere room acoustic ) and in second only about gear design ... 😊

Well, to the 'Golden ears' how were you trained? When I think of training of the senses, I think of how Sommeliers are trained. They are trained on taste, smell, grape, terrior, etc. They are all trained the same way. No audiophile is trained that way, unless they are a musician. Otherwise, just listening to cables is like being home schooled. That is all ego, all it is, to think one is as good as say as sommelier.

Sorry, that is why blind testing is important it takes the ego out of it.

Why apologize for your beliefs? No one who knows better will take issue with your hubristic statement. Been there too many times to count. This is old news. They'll just move on, making improvements in their systems by using that which has served them so well all this time: their ears.

As for Somms, have you ever met one and did a fair amount of wine tasting with them? If so, you'd find your analogy a faulty construct. Their ability to discern is inherent in their DNA, like all of our senses. Some are "wired" for it, others not so much, with lots of grey area between the two. Out of a couple thousand DNA combinations, around 300 make up an individuals tasting abilities, making it almost (if not just like) fingerprints: no two are alike.

Same goes for ones hearing, eyesight, sense of smell, and touch. I've seen someone reading font of this size (about 15 for my purposes) from a chart a good 12 feet away, easily (he had 15/20 vision and was testing his son who was the same while bored in the DMV). Why would one think all hearing is alike and begrudge others who just have better hearing capabilities? That is ego.

All the best,
Nonoise