Amir and Blind Testing


Let me start by saying I like watching Amir from ASR, so please let’s not get harsh or the thread will be deleted. Many times, Amir has noted that when we’re inserting a new component in our system, our brains go into (to paraphrase) “analytical mode” and we start hearing imaginary improvements. He has reiterated this many times, saying that when he switched to an expensive cable he heard improvements, but when he switched back to the cheap one, he also heard improvements because the brain switches from “music enjoyment mode” to “analytical mode.” Following this logic, which I agree with, wouldn’t blind testing, or any A/B testing be compromised because our brains are always in analytical mode and therefore feeding us inaccurate data? Seems to me you need to relax for a few hours at least and listen to a variety of music before your brain can accurately assess whether something is an actual improvement.  Perhaps A/B testing is a strawman argument, because the human brain is not a spectrum analyzer.  We are too affected by our biases to come up with any valid data.  Maybe. 

chayro

Neither of those hypotheticals would explain why a cable might not meet expectations, as, according to many, they shouldn’t make any difference at all!

My two possibilities are clearly not the only reasons, I just threw in a couple suggestions.

What do you suggest could be a reason that a cable may not meet expectations in the context of this thread?  Is this a common experience?

Incidentally, the level matching thing I wrote about earlier may not be such an issue with cables, although someone with specific experience may correct me.

Seems to me you need to relax for a few hours at least and listen to a variety of music before your brain can accurately assess whether something is an actual improvement. 

I can get the feel of a new piece of gear in a few days but it takes longer than that to play enough different pieces of music to get the final answer. After a few days, it would be hard to fool your brain into thinking that something was better if it is not. Long term testing is the only way equipment can be reviewed. 

Amir limited argument apply only for ONE change...

In an incremental ongoing process of MULTIPLE ORIENTED changes like adding multiple devices to controls the mechanical, electrical and acoustical working dimensions of our audio system, and for the tuning process of our room/speakers, our own LEARNED biases and audio history are an advantage and a tool and they are also our perspective peripheral original vision who make us able to focus on some center of attention at will... It is not only an analytical habit it is ALSO a synthesis of our sound interpretative history : a learned set of biases...

All biases are not always bad and a spectral analyser always right...it is not so simplistic...Science is not playing with tools....It is conceptual and experimental...

Acoustic is the main matter in audio not electronic engineering...Sorry for those who dont know this elementary fact ....

Let Amir play with his tools and we will set or system/room like we will like to enjoy it for music...I buy nothing, never upgrade and create my own devices... And i am satisfied ....I dont need obsessed tools fanatics to teach me that adding a quartz crystal+shungite and copper on a cable is stupid... I know what my ears teach me....All my devices cost peanuts but my system dont sound like peanuts...

Why there is not GENERAL acoustic thread in audio forums save precise questions sometimes by some but no GENERAL acoustic thread... I started one and it goes dead in days....

I will say why?

It is because people like Amir and the so called subjectivist think that it is electronic engineering that gives to us sound experience... It is not even wrong.... For me it is IGNORANCE or a lie... It is acoustic and psycho-acoustic that explain sound and give us music and sound higher experience... Not upgrading with the advice of Amir or from a fan of a brand name product...

 

 

My best to all....

 

Perhaps A/B testing is a strawman argument, because the human brain is not a spectrum analyzer. We are too affected by our biases to come up with any valid data. Maybe.

I have to chime in here just to say that I am gratified to see an actual discussion of a topic as opposed to the “wresting-match” mentality these things often take on. DCS vs MSB. Bruno Sammartino vs Dr. Tanaka, etc.  Too much of a battle scenario for my taste. Obviously, I was a fan in my younger days, but I prefer a more civilized tone for audio. Just my opinion.

You cannot tune a room by blindfolding each step of your process...

You cannot fine tune sets of springs under and on top of each speakers damped by concrete load in my case, you cannot fine tune this at near 100 gram of precise loading weight blinfolded...

You cannot put in place 40 pieces of shungite and copper all along your electrical grid blind folded it is unnecessary to begins with...

And all others of my various devices like Schumann resonators grid i dontneed to be blindfolded to test it.... It is enough to set them off or on, each one at a times..And listen to the huge final difference...

Same process for my grid of different ionizers ....Samething for my other devices...

 

Blindtest is a tool for industrial reasearch yes and for marketing purpose also yes, it could be interesting to play with it in audiophile experience why not? it is fun yes...

But it is USELESS for my embeddings controls journey in mechanical,electrical and acoustical experiments in my own room...It will make my journey impossible to even start because of the complex burden which is related to scientific blind testing protocol.... 😁😊

It is ignorance to promote systematic blind test in audiophile tuning....Any audiophile can put off or put on something and listen and decide erroneously in some case but anyway being right in most cases... . It will be impossible anyway to blind test EVERYTHING...Perhaps some of my devices is not anything than a placebo effect for sure, but that did not explain the HUGE S.Q. improvement i enjoy now after many hundred of SMALL changes...

Our goal is creating a pleasurable acoustic experience of music in a system/room synergy for our own ears..

Our goal is not to set the OBJECTIVE standard for an industrial product where blind testing is a crucial step...

Objectivist and subjectivist division is a childish division who make no sense whatsoever in acoustic and in psycho-acoustic where only the correlation of each OBJECTIVE change or measure is CORRELATED under control by a guiding SUBJECTIVE judgment...

The important word here is not subjective nor objective but controlled correlation...

And blind test is a form of controlled correlation yes... But reducing all form of controlled correlation to thisone only is foolish... Especially in the incremental process of acoustic tuning of our room which may implicate many hundred of small changes by listening experiments...

 

 

For The measures problem: all is measurable in principle but we cannot measures all that can be measured or all that must be measured  anyway and in some case we dont know what to measure... And anyway no one has the same ears/brain history and stuctural working... We differ... Then to set a room and tuning it  measures are necessary but are only tags all along the road not the road itself...