1. Home
  2. cables
  3. 166355-2693

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
teo_audio
2,197 posts
 

the longer a question exists, the more fundamental the error in the formulation of the question.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The lack of reconciliation here, and the general kindness of the group that supports the difference in cables, as expressed toward the naysayers..

... vs the general violence expressed by the naysayers, speaks to the understanding that the naysayer group is missing understanding, or data.... within their ideas on the totality of the data required - for the formulation of the question.

Ie, that the naysayers are, generally, not in good enough psychological shape and reach to be asking the question, and the known path of substitute activity for people in such condition where questions ill formed turn to being demands, is to project and possibly act out violence.

This situation of general kindness vs general violence is what we consistently see here, in these areas of clashing.

ebm
9,311 posts
 

Because its FUN.

unreceivedogma's avatar
unreceivedogma
1,172 posts
 

My approach to audio these days really helps me to stay out of these arguments.

it’s simple: I like the way my audio sounds. Until I don’t. And then I fix it. And I have zero expectations of persuading anyone to like what I did to make it sound they way it does. The only audience member that matters is me.

it is so much less stressful. You audiogon folks should try it: the Don’t Worry Be Happy approach to fine listening

 

jjss49's avatar
jjss49
6,926 posts
 

My approach to audio these days really helps me to stay out of these arguments.

it’s simple: I like the way my audio sounds. Until I don’t. And then I fix it. And I have zero expectations of persuading anyone to like what I did to make it sound they way it does. The only audience member that matters is me.

it is so much less stressful. You audiogon folks should try it: the Don’t Worry Be Happy approach to fine listening

while there is wisdom in this approach, i have a bit of a different take as to what i try to do here on the a-gon discussion forum

i feel this is a community of hobbyists, and as an experienced member of this community, i am happy to share my experiences if it can help others who need info or are just newer to the hobby and are not on the same point of the learning curve - and of course to continue learning more myself from other well regarded well spoken folks here as well

i think the major pitfall for all those who try to contribute here is to take different views personally and take it as offensive regarding one’s own findings and beliefs... this hobby at its best brings a lot of enjoyment to those who make the effort to build nice systems, and there are so many successful approaches to doing so, not to mention so many differing tastes in what is enjoyed... trick is not to put oneself and oneself’s ego into it...

reubent
7,257 posts
 

@unreceivedogma - the Don’t Worry Be Happy approach to fine listening

Ha! Do a search of AudiogoN for "Don’t Worry, Be Happy".You’ll see, it’s also been my philosophy for years. It’s simple, but liberating...

More to discover