Why Do So Many Audiophiles Reject Blind Testing Of Audio Components?


Because it was scientifically proven to be useless more than 60 years ago.

A speech scientist by the name of Irwin Pollack have conducted an experiment in the early 1950s. In a blind ABX listening test, he asked people to distinguish minimal pairs of consonants (like “r” and “l”, or “t” and “p”).

He found out that listeners had no problem telling these consonants apart when they were played back immediately one after the other. But as he increased the pause between the playbacks, the listener’s ability to distinguish between them diminished. Once the time separating the sounds exceeded 10-15 milliseconds (approximately 1/100th of a second), people had a really hard time telling obviously different sounds apart. Their answers became statistically no better than a random guess.

If you are interested in the science of these things, here’s a nice summary:

Categorical and noncategorical modes of speech perception along the voicing continuum

Since then, the experiment was repeated many times (last major update in 2000, Reliability of a dichotic consonant-vowel pairs task using an ABX procedure.)

So reliably recognizing the difference between similar sounds in an ABX environment is impossible. 15ms playback gap, and the listener’s guess becomes no better than random. This happens because humans don't have any meaningful waveform memory. We cannot exactly recall the sound itself, and rely on various mental models for comparison. It takes time and effort to develop these models, thus making us really bad at playing "spot the sonic difference right now and here" game.

Also, please note that the experimenters were using the sounds of speech. Human ears have significantly better resolution and discrimination in the speech spectrum. If a comparison method is not working well with speech, it would not work at all with music.

So the “double blind testing” crowd is worshiping an ABX protocol that was scientifically proven more than 60 years ago to be completely unsuitable for telling similar sounds apart. And they insist all the other methods are “unscientific.”

The irony seems to be lost on them.

Why do so many audiophiles reject blind testing of audio components? - Quora
artemus_5
An objectivist enters a bar.

Bartender asks: What can I pleasure you with?

Objectivist: what does this have to do with anything?
I will repeat myself....

Objectivist and subjectivist, is a "stupid" distinction...

Whose decided to create  so stupid distinction in the first place ?

Asking the question is interesting....And revelatory about "sophisticated" stupidity....
Very unfortunate indeed. And stupid. But it’s the reality. Unfortunate. And did I say stupid? Sophisticated or not. 
For some reason, when I hear about “subjective” and “objective”, I think about bunkers, trenches, and such.

I know. Stupid. Sophisticated stupidity 
No audiophile reject blindtest...Accusing audiophile to refusing them is a "strawman" strategy...

Anyway it is not simple to organize...tHose accusing audiophiles know this...

It is not practical to organize one for each one of ALL alleged audible perception of change...

The value of a blindtest is very limited to a borderline debatable improvement...

The placebo accusation is ridicule because out of this borderline zone of small audible debatable improvements, anyone could verify immediately the reality of some changes...The "bias" accusation made no sense for most improvement in the control of vibrations, and the decreasing of the electrical noise floor and for any acoustic changes... The cables? the fuses? I dont use these "tweaks"... I focus more on essential improvements...

I implemented many hundreds of changes in the last 2 years, many being perhaps placebos, yes, but the majority being not for sure....The proof is the end result...

I could not erganized a blindtest for all modifications one after the other it would be ridiculous... And anyway placebo is not a problem at all nor in medecine neither in audio....Save for companies selling "snake oil" which are a minority....

It seems those who inhabit audio thread contesting ALL audiophile experiences and experiments in listening are "crusader" of the skeptic sunday children club or "trolls" blinded by their technological idolatry....Instead of attacking consumers of "tweaks" they would made a better aiming of the target if they attacked the supposed culprit companies publicly and if they challenged them ...Not their "alleged "victims"....But trolls or zealots are not Robin Hood vigilante....They work for another agenda...

In general any sane individual dont need blindtest except to play and amuse himself.... In general it is marketing or industry that use the statistical tool of blindtest...

The  perpetual proposal of blindtest then reveal more about those who propose it than about those supposedly refusing it...

It is a comical and pathetical situation that reflect  the "religious" aspect of technological idolatry....