Amir and Blind Testing

Very good posts thanks !

I will add that not only aural memory can be improved but also must be learned with the body sensation not with only the brain or the mind but with the heart... Why?

Because mechanisms of memory are linked to perception and interpretation of sound which are themselves related to the feeling body and are stored in this body not only in the brain or mind...

The sound of a duduk is unmistakable for example and provoke a feeling you will never forget, same with the chinese Erhu, wich are insruments with a timbre linked to an innate feeling so powerful we cannot forget it....Same with guitar, organ, piano etc....Any sound is associated with a distinct feeling varying in each of us for sure but not so much, it is the reason why music is a universal language...

Each instrument is deep in meaning and unique like a human voice....

It is the reason why doctor can reach alzheimer patient with music and for a moment ressuscitate a true part of them from oblivion...The sound feeling perceived by their body BEFORE their mind even interpret it, ressuscitate their consciousness for a fleeting moment by association with their past experiences with music...

It is the reason by "measuring tool fetichist " often claim that sound memory is measured in few seconds and cannot be remembered... This is not false, this is only an half-truth used for "ideological" cultist motivation...

For sure a bit of sound WITHOUT MEANING detached from our usual environment and detached from strong feeling cannot be remembered well...Pick a sound meaning you very well know by "heart" not only mind, and listen continuously IN A RELAXED condition  to it in your usual environment and you will KNOW and DETECT any change in the sound qualities...Even if you had not listen some piece of recording for weeks and you put it after having changed the acoustic of your room you may detect huge change... i just live that a few minutes before writing this post myself with a recording i know  by heart but which i did not listen to for a few months...

it is my own experience and experiments...

How do you think i was able to tune mechanically adjustable100 Helmholtz tubes resonators and diffusers in my room ?

No i am not a bat nor a " golden ear".... I know my hearing are the hearing of a 70 years old man in health for sure but...But we memorize acoustic MEANING in our body/brain not ONLY brute meaningless sound measured in Hertz and decibels...

I was able to tune my room with my feeling and perceptive memory, stored in my brain/body of what must be a natural timbre...For sure it is not perfect.... Timbre perception is a SUBJECTIVE phenomenon in psycho-acoustic... But there exist OBJECTIVE acoustical conditions necessary to be inplemented to generate a more natural timbre perception...The rest is my CORRELATION process between many objective preparation and disposition of the room and my subjective apparatus..

 

 

Aural memory is the result of a learning process, and an ability that we can develop just as any other cognitive function. Improving it is the same as learning a new skill.

When there is effort put in, it can be vastly improved upon, and conversely, lack of training will result in the decline of aural memory faculties.

Just as we can remember words, colors, pictures, we remember sounds with analogous mechanisms. A person who can retain a 7 digit number for 10 seconds can train to withhold it in memory for an hour or longer, eventually retaining the ability to call back the number after a longer time period, and with increased digit counts.

Same with aural memory.

As every learned skill, it takes a lot of effort....some people have a head-start, but ultimately perseverance is key, and is the secret to a good aural memory.

A/B test cannot substitute an acute aural memory.... perhaps with an A/B selector switch we can cut out the time-caused retention-loss... yet, in case the aural perception and memory is so poor that it fades in seconds, then the detail observation skills are also comparatively abysmal. In consequence, the A/B tester with poor aural skills does not have the cognitive faculties to perform the test in a competent way.

 

 

A blind listening test is not a test for bias.
It shows that listening under those conditions is mostly more difficult, but it does not explain WHY it is more difficult. People are quick to jump on the bias train, but this may not be correct.

Also it may be a bit pedantic to assume that experienced audiophiles can’t distinguish between music mode and analytical mode.

Also, why would Amir not be biased himself? Maybe he does not want to hear (or accept) a difference?

Also, as we still not completely sure WHY we experience differences in cables, who is to say he is even measuring the right parameters? What if our brain can detect the differences? How will we measure that?

To be clear: I am not saying he is wrong, but I am suggesting that there are too many questions left unanswered to conclude that he is right.

Wise post and rightful observation... Thanks!

Welcome here indeed....

 

A blind listening test is not a test for bias.
It shows that listening under those conditions is mostly more difficult, but it does not explain WHY it is more difficult.

I’m unclear on what you are saying. On your account: What about "listening" is "more difficult" under blind test conditions?

 

Also, why would Amir not be biased himself? Maybe he does not want to hear (or accept) a difference?

Especially when it comes to vetting a controversial technical claim for audible differences, Amirm’s sighted impressions are no more reliable in of themselves than anyone else’s.

That’s why in principle anyone who BELIEVES he hears a difference could test themselves (using blind testing to help rule out sighted bias).

That said, Amirm’s sighted impressions are at least backed up pretty heavily by the objective evidence he presents. Unlike the usual audiophile anecdote or audiophile marketing.

 

Also, as we still not completely sure WHY we experience differences in cables, who is to say he is even measuring the right parameters? What if our brain can detect the differences? How will we measure that?

To be clear: I am not saying he is wrong, but I am suggesting that there are too many questions left unanswered to conclude that he is right.

By that measure you couldn’t establish any conclusion!

The best we ever have is what the evidence suggests.

First of all, we can test whether your "brain" can detect any differences via blind testing. If sighted bias and knowledge are ruled out, and you are ONLY able to use your hearing and you can not reliably detect a difference between A and B, then it’s reasonable to assume you aren’t detecting any difference.

This is how standard audiograms/audio tests work for hearing, right? If you can’t reliably detect tones over 12k, guess what? You can’t hear over 12k even if you CLAIM to or believe you can or not.

Similarly all sorts of tests have been done to establish the parameters of most of our senses, including hearing. Once you are down to a certain level of distortion, nobody has shown they can reliably detect it hence no reason to think we can hear it. It follows that if you measure a device and the distortion levels in various relevant parameters don’t rise above the known audible threshholds, then the reasonable conclusion is "that distortion is not audible."

We aren’t beholden to any person’s claim to have Super Human Hearing..unless they can demonstrate it in similar controlled tests.

The engineering involved, the principles on which USB cables are designed, tells us that any competently designed USB cable will transmit the 1s and 0s just fine, especially when used with a competently designed DAC.  And that heroic measures beyond that are rarely needed (and in any case, would be unlikely to be responsible for the sonic claims made on behalf of those cables).

Amirm tested for ANY way the Nordost cable altered the signal, looking for any relevant distortions, and there was nothing relevant to distinguish it’s performance from a cheap amazon cable. Before someone says "But we can HEAR the difference so maybe he’s measuring the wrong thing" you should be able to DEMONSTRATE you can hear the difference to take that claim seriously. And that would be under conditions controlling for your knowledge of which USB cable is being used. Otherwise it’s just begging the question.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amir does us all a great service with his site and all the testing. I rarely find fault with any of his useful illustrations. Go Amir!

The problem with Amir is what comes after the measurements. I want to know what he found but when he begins the inevitable explanation of how anything beyond 20-20K and below -60dB can't possibly be heard--I start wetting my pants.

I know that's MY problem but it's a cause/effect that limits watching him.