Why blind listening tests are flawed


This may sound like pure flame war bait - but here it is anyway. Since rebuilding my system from scratch, and auditioning everything from preamps to amps to dacs to interconnects to speaker cable etc, it seems clearer than ever.

I notice that I get easily fooled between bad and great sounding gear during blind auditions. Most would say "That should tell you that the quality of the gear is closer than you thought. Trust it".

But it's the process of blind listening tests that's causing the confusion, not a case of what I prefer to believe or justify to myself. And I think I know why it happens.

Understanding the sound of audio gear is process of accumulated memories. You can listen to say new speakers for weeks and love them until you start hearing something that bothers you until you can't stand them anymore.

Subconsciously you're building a library of impressions that continues to fill in the blanks of the overall sound. When all the holes are filled - you finally have a very clear grasp of the sonic signature. But we know that doesn't happen overnight.

This explains why many times you'll love how something sounds until you don't anymore? Anyone experience that? I have - with all 3 B&W speakers upgrades I've made in my life just to name a few.

Swapping out gear short term for blind listening tests is therefore counter productive for accurately understanding the characteristics of any particular piece or system because it causes discontinuity with impression accumulation and becomes subtractive rather than additive. Confusion becomes the guaranteed outcome instead of clarity. In fact it's a systematic unlearning of the sound characteristics as the impression accumulation is randomized. Wish I could think of a simpler way of saying that..

Ok this is getting even further out there but: Also I believe that when you're listening while looking at equipment there are certain anchors that also accumulate. You may hear a high hat that sounds shimmering and subconsciously that impression is associated with some metallic color or other visual aspect of the equipment you happen to be watching or remember.

By looking at (or even mentally picturing) your equipment over time you have an immediate association with its' sound. Sounds strange, but I've noticed this happening myself - and I have no doubt it speeds up the process of getting a peg on the overall sound character.

Obviously blind tests would void that aspect too resulting in less information rather than more for comparison.

Anyone agree with this, because I don't remember hearing this POV before. But I'm sure many others that have stated this because, of course, it happens to be true. ;
larrybou

Showing 4 responses by larrybou

I've been comparing multiple speaker wire lately and found the only way I could come to any kind of strong conclusions about their overall was to listen to each one several days at a time in my system.

It could have saved lots of time if a couple hours of blind listening tests would have declared an easy winner. But after a few days of listening to each with a wide variety of music, the winner was absolutely clear. And putting it back in my system weeks later confirmed that my opinion of them hadn't changed an iota.

Maybe it's just the way my brain works, but I can't really imagine anyone getting such a rock steady bead on various gear through blind listening tests.
"Larrybou - what you need to do after listening to cables for days at a time and then declaring a winner is to have someone else switch the losing cable back in without you knowing."

Maybe so. But I wouldn't trust the conclusion until I was able to spend a good number of hours listening to a variety of material on the losing cable. And then if I knew when the cable was switched, and knew it was the losing cable it wouldn't serve any purpose. If I didn't know when the cable was switched, then my memory is being tricked and it would be counter productive since I wouldn't know at what point I was listening to what cable.
"Short-term tests ignore the mechanism of mental schemas, whereby we build mental models of everything we sense. A short test ignores the mind's need to build schemas to understand constructions of various concepts (e.g., sonic signatures, musical values, etc.) and compare their virtues over time."

I knew there was a better way of saying it..
Lets not forget that magazines charge the equipment manufacturers for equipment reviews via advertising contracts. This is why overtly bad reviews are rarely seen (and when they happen you can be sure no such contract was signed).