I choose to believe just because someone says something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true.
Blind Testing is Dead - Long live My Wallet testing.
Hi Everyone,
I was seeing some discussions around cables, and reading other discussions about A'gon members asking for opinions on different alternatives for hooking up a DAC, or TV sound, or whatever, and it made me think of this.
I want to tie a few things together:
A lot has been made about double blind testing, and a lot of readers rely on taste masters (web sites, magazines and social media) and whether in fact these taste masters can hear anything at all. Reminds me a lot of blind testing of wines, or an article I read recently about how much super rare whiskey is fake.
When deciding on a bit of kit, I could not care less about double blind testing. I care about :
We should also note that I'm a bit of an iconoclast. Most consumers also care about:
What is my message then? My message is that this is all cute, like reading about movies or books or music shows, but in the end, it's my wallet, no one else's. John Atkinson is not buying my speakers for me. I am. My hard work creates value which I use some of (sometimes too much) to buy audio related products. The more you detach yourself from brands, costs and worries about measurements the more frugal, and happier you will be.
Best,
Erik
I was seeing some discussions around cables, and reading other discussions about A'gon members asking for opinions on different alternatives for hooking up a DAC, or TV sound, or whatever, and it made me think of this.
I want to tie a few things together:
- Most technical measurements consumers read were defined by the 1970s. It is fair to describe them as stagnant.
- The cost to benefit ratio of a lot of products can vary a great deal.
- I hear things I can't yet measure in cables and crossover components.
- I like measurements.
- Someday measurements commonly discussed among consumers will improve and better tie our values to technology.
A lot has been made about double blind testing, and a lot of readers rely on taste masters (web sites, magazines and social media) and whether in fact these taste masters can hear anything at all. Reminds me a lot of blind testing of wines, or an article I read recently about how much super rare whiskey is fake.
When deciding on a bit of kit, I could not care less about double blind testing. I care about :
- What audible value can I perceive?
- Is the price proportional to that value?
- Is my money better spent on a vacation or liquor?
We should also note that I'm a bit of an iconoclast. Most consumers also care about:
- Brand recognition
- Style
- Perception of modernity (is it cutting edge no one else has)
- Perception of construction (how much does it weigh, how is it packaged)
- Ability to create envy.
- Price ( if it's too inexpensive, it can't be good! )
What is my message then? My message is that this is all cute, like reading about movies or books or music shows, but in the end, it's my wallet, no one else's. John Atkinson is not buying my speakers for me. I am. My hard work creates value which I use some of (sometimes too much) to buy audio related products. The more you detach yourself from brands, costs and worries about measurements the more frugal, and happier you will be.
Best,
Erik
- ...
- 50 posts total
| Post removed |
Get your headphones and give it a try. The test ranges from 6 dB to 0.1 dB. My old ears can't discern anything below 1.0 dB. https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=0.5 |
I don’t see many, or any, agon members blindly following reviewers. That said, Art Dudley is probably my favorite audio writer just in terms of talent and style, and Michael Fremer is probably my favorite reviewer (of speakers) because Fremer seems to capture in print the character of a speaker so well. (When I’ve heard speakers Fremer has reviewed, they usually sound just as he’d described). As for blind testing, as I’ve said many times before, no gastopo squad is breaking in to anyone’s home to force blind testing, and no one should bother with it if it doesn’t interest them. I don’t bother blind testing the majority of what I buy. At the same time, I can’t pretend our hobby is magically exempt from all the same variables in perceptual bias that humans suffer from in every other endeavour. I have no problem whatsoever admitting that my perceptions may be in error, for any number of reasons. But it’s damned fun to trade subjective impressions of gear. |
prof As for blind testing, as I’ve said many times before, no gastopo squad is breaking in to anyone’s home to force blind testing, and no one should bother with it if it doesn’t interest them. I don’t bother blind testing the majority of what I buy. At the same time, I can’t pretend our hobby is magically exempt from all the same variables in perceptual bias that humans suffer from in every other endeavour. I have no problem whatsoever admitting that my perceptions may be in error, for any number of reasons. But it’s damned fun to trade subjective impressions of gear. >>>>>Why pick on perceptual variables? There are too many physical and electrical variables and potential errors in the test system or test procedure to be able to control. No one seems to even know what all the variables are. For that reason alone test results should be suspect. Besides not everyone is impressed by the cost or appearance or advance buzz of audio devices or components. Maybe newbies are, maybe not. Who knows? Did I already mention the ulterior motives some people might have in pushing for blind tests? In addition, there is no comparison between audio and “other endeavors” - audio is infinitely more complex than say, wine tasting or medical trials. Thus, many more things can go wrong in the test. Audio test results have little or no significance. Note to self: Blind test proponents apparently can’t help pushing blind tests even while pretending to be nonchalant about it. Must be a new strategy. 😄 |
- 50 posts total