Where are the blind streaming quality tests?


I've been searching around for awhile now trying to find a good article/report on how many audiophiles on a decent system (at least $1000) can hear the difference between Apple Music and TIDAL and can reliably pick which one is "better sounding" in a blind test environment. It seems most blind tests I have found show that people really can't say one service sounds better than the others. But they often are using a <$100 audio setup. Many people on here claim that they can hear a huge difference between AAC and FLAC or MQA etc. but without any evidence or test results.

So I'll challenge everyone: get someone else to switch between lossless audio and compressed without your knowledge. Also have them sometimes just do a "fake switch" where they say they changed something but really kept playing the same thing. Or better yet use the NPR test online. Can you still reliably pick the lossless audio over multiple trials with a variety of music? Post which songs you used, if you guessed right on that track, and maybe a list of gear you used for your test. Let's see if we can get some real scientific results here!
Ag insider logo xs@2xmattlathrop
@cleeds 
First off I have conducted and participated in psychological studies relating to human perception. So I do get what is truly needed. But a simple blind test as I have described would be an excellent start given that no one seems to have even done that. Sure the results won't be getting published in any journals, but it would be a good jumping off point for a more formal study. 

the results are often vague, or inconclusive.
This statement is exactly why I want people to do this. My hypothesis is the same as yours. I think people will find that the results aren't a clear cut answer. BUT if you were an audiophile starting out and read these forums you would think that if you don't listen TIDAL you have just wasted your money on an expensive stereo (this *literally* happened to me when a dealer who will remain nameless told me he didn't want to work with me if I only listened to Apple Music...)

Just to share my personal experience: I feel I can tell the difference between TIDAL and Apple Music when I switch back and forth, but when I took the NPR test with some Audeze headphones I didn't do better than randomly guessing. 

@n80 It is neat to find another audiophile who also likes photography! I completely agree with your point about photography. Imagine choosing to buy camera A or B based on seeing a set of test images taken with both cameras where you have to look at black for 2 seconds every time you flip between them.
@cleeds, such a study for audiophiles does not have to be comparable to drug studies and such. I think a broad range of listeners is an okay idea but I don't think it is necessary. I think any group of audiophile journalists would be where you would start. One type of music. Test no more that three variables. Start slow and simple. Maybe 10 listeners/subjects. The point being, there are no decent studies at all. _Anything_ would be an improvement.

mattlathrop, agree about photography. I think immediately about lens MTF charts. They don't tell the whole story about a lens.....but they tell and awful lot.
I have done a blind test on Tidal vs the actual cd. I picked and preferred Tidal all three times. The CDs were ripped into my Sound Science music server using DB poweramp. I used the same server to stream Tidal.
I took the NPR test and did quite well, missing one. 

Here's one from cnbc done back in 2016:
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/05/hifi-music-streaming-services-people-cant-tell-it-when-they-hear-it.html

Here's also some contrary thoughts on the matter of blind listening tests:

https://www.audiostream.com/content/trouble-audio-tests
&
https://www.audiostream.com/content/blind-testing-golden-ears-and-envy-oh-my

The last two are not meant to start a flame war but intend to keep an open mind as to the supposed standards set by "objectivists" who, in the end, are just as subjective as anyone.

All the best,
Nonoise