The Absolute Sound vs Pleasing Sound

larsman

Not going to get it to sound like 'real live music' because you have no idea what the circumstances are under which it was recorded, what the mic placement was, how it was mixed, etc ...

You can have a fairly good idea if you make your own recordings.

audio2design

Bias exists. Period.

No. Bias can exist. It doesn’t always exist. Not every opinion is the result of bias.

Only way to eliminate is to blind test ...

That is the logical fallacy of the excluded middle, aka tertium non datur. But I understand that your "one path to truth" approach suits your measurementalist’s belief system.

Here’s a simple truth about bias and placebo effect: Neither will cure cancer. No blind test is needed to prove that.

frogman

... What is even sadder, IMO, is to be locked in a mindset that says that reactions are the result of bias and to refuse to be open minded about the possibility that it is not bias at all that is at play. Seems to me, that the person who is enlightened enough to understand bias should also be the one most open to the possibility that it is NOT always bias that is at play...

That's one of the ironies about the measurementalists here. They'll even often refuse to listen to test whether their theories are valid - they have that much faith in their belief system.

The other irony: The measurementalists frequently apply ill logic to their claims, so it makes meaningful conversation with them virtually impossible. Many of these measurementalists are here solely to argue, so these apparent inconsistencies suit them just fine.

audio2design

Show me evidence of a blind test ... That is all you have to do. Don’t make false claims. Show the tests and results ...

We’ve been through this before. No one here owes you evidence of anything, ever. This is a hobbyist’s group, not a scientific forum. It’s well within forum rules for users here to report their listening experiences. You seem to struggle accepting that.

Of course, you are free to submit the results of any tests that you like.

russ69

Putting an audio system together that is satisfying is the main point ... People buy gear, but it in their system and listen to the results ... Long term evaluation is how that is accomplished. You cannot fool yourself for very long if the system is not to your liking. Short term evaluation or short term testing is very unreliable ...

Exactly, and that's among the challenges for those trying to conduct scientifically valid listening tests. Those who bleat about expectation bias and placebo effect don't seem to understand that neither can cure cancer, and neither will make a poor sounding audio system sound better.

audio2design

Those that blather on about listening tests, blind testing, and other things they clearly don’t understand and do it repeatedly, reinforcing the evidence of their lack of knowledge, don’t seem to get basic premises.Blind testing is an auditory test.

No, what you’re arguing for isn’t an auditory test, although that’s a common misnomer. Auditory tests are conducted by audiologists. The listening tests you describe don’t even test the listener - they test the DUT , the device under test.

Blind testing is to remove bias. No more. No less.

That’s true as to intent. But the test introduces it’s own complications, which are well documented, e.g. test anxiety. You can’t dismiss them with a wave of the hand while at the same time claiming scientific objectivity.

There is 0, none, nada requirement that the test be done fast, slow, or otherwise.

That’s true, there is no such requirement. But as a practical matter, time is often very much a limiting factor in these tests.

Most of this testing revolves around detecting differences ... the naysayers will not be able to produce a shred of evidence to support their position they need long term listening tests.

There’s abundant evidence to support the preference for long-term listening tests. Of course, no evidence is needed to justify a preference.

So, stop blathering and produce evidence that long term listening tests (which must be blind obviously) are better at determining whether a change had any impact of not.

We’ve been through this before. No one here owes you evidence of anything, ever. This is a hobbyist’s group, not a scientific forum. You seem to struggle accepting that not everyone here embraces your measurementalist’s view of the world, and that’s probably why you’ve been banned here previously under multiple different user names.

To be clear, I’m not one who’s opposed to blind testing. I don’t think such tests have much usefulness to the typical audiophile, in particular because conducting a valid blind test is nowhere near as easy as some of its most vocal advocates suggest. Plus, they are simply tedious and boring. But for those who like them, or those who use them to assist in component design, they surely have their place.