Quote:
How many audio systems out there just don

Quote:

Quote:
How many audio systems out there just don

Go to something like the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest and/or hang with serious two-channel music lovers and you'll see many very revealing systems.

Most HT/AV receivers will screw up 2-channel reproduction royally. Generally, you'll need a dedicated 2-channel system for the best 2-channel sound.

Dave

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
How many audio systems out there just don

Quote:
Unfortunately blind testing has some real problems, one of which is habituation to stimuli, known in the medical community for decades, but not compensated for in dbt audio testing. Cochlea fatigue is another well known problem.

Not trying to start a fight, but these problems are quite well known as flaws that corrupt the input data.

Cheers.

Sorry to be so stupid, but what? Do these "things" not happen in other comparisions?

Quote:

Quote:
Unfortunately blind testing has some real problems, one of which is habituation to stimuli, known in the medical community for decades, but not compensated for in dbt audio testing. Cochlea fatigue is another well known problem.

Not trying to start a fight, but these problems are quite well known as flaws that corrupt the input data.

Cheers.

Sorry to be so stupid, but what? Do these "things" not happen in other comparisions?

No you are not. Just that some think subjective audio DBT somehow doesn't have many, if any problems. They all have problems. Another point is that gathering accurate data never seems to be discussed.
Subjective DBTs have approximately the same flaws as sighted listening, so subjective DBTs are not a panecea.

MJS, I agree, systems vary in sensitivity.

Cheers.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Unfortunately blind testing has some real problems, one of which is habituation to stimuli, known in the medical community for decades, but not compensated for in dbt audio testing. Cochlea fatigue is another well known problem.

Not trying to start a fight, but these problems are quite well known as flaws that corrupt the input data.

Cheers.

Sorry to be so stupid, but what? Do these "things" not happen in other comparisions?

No you are not. Just that some think subjective audio DBT somehow doesn't have many, if any problems. They all have problems. Another point is that gathering accurate data never seems to be discussed.
Subjective DBTs have approximately the same flaws as sighted listening, so subjective DBTs are not a panecea.

MJS, I agree, systems vary in sensitivity.

Cheers.

A quicky. For instance if one sets up the room to be bass heavy, one can mask inner detail etc and skew the test towards no sonic difference. There are ways to manipulate a subjective DBT test towards a false conclusion even though the "confidence level" is high.

Quote:
For instance if one sets up the room to be bass heavy, one can mask inner detail etc and skew the test towards no sonic difference. There are ways to manipulate a subjective DBT test towards a false conclusion even though the "confidence level" is high.

Good example, Steve.

Another practical problem is that listener skill is variable. This is similar to whether one notices nutmeg in the soup or not. Part of this is training and experience, part is intrinsic ability.

Thus whether differences are detected is as much about whether the listener can detect the difference as it is about whether the difference is there.

I am continually impressed by those that design equipment that are able to trust their own ears in sighted testing. If I designed the amp or preamp or speaker I would desperately want it to sound good. It would take a long time to learn to leave expectation bias at the door.

Lot of great points about DBT.

One point some objectivists seem to forget is that a negative result doesn't mean a difference doesn't exist. All the caveats mentioned in previous posts could be the reason a diff isn't heard.

A lot of arguments between Obs and Subs could be defused by remembering that.

A positive result does indicate that a difference is heard that is not the result of expectation bias.

At a Stereophile Show perhaps a decade ago, Audioquest modified a boom box so that it could accept their speaker cables on its detachable speakers. Even on a boom box, one could hear the diff. as they went up the chain, from their least expensive speaker cables to the top-of-the-line.

Way before I began writing for audiophile publications, I used to thank people who hosted me during my travels by replacing the lamp cord on their speakers with $25 cable. It was a revelation in all but one case. In that instance, my host in Boston had speakers so bad that the better cable, which delivered more sonic information, made the speakers' cracked cones sound even worse.

jason who has edited this five times because it time to call it a night in Beijing

I'd love to hear that Audioquest demo. Neat idea.

Your "replace the lampcord" gift was and is a great idea. I need to keep this in mind as a fun housewarming gift for the musically inclined.

Quote:

I do think DBT has a place, however...

Instantaneous DBT with music demands too much analysis in too short a period of time - to me, it's much like showing someone a picture of an arena full of people and quickly switching between two pics where one or two people may have changed position or colors of shirt. It can't be accomplished with a general DBT; but once the difference has been identified, then DBT would give consistent and accurate results because someone knows where to look, or, in our case, listen!

With music being so ever changing from moment to moment, listening fatigue, wandering attention...I agree that DBT without a context leads to gibberish results.

With general DBT...Having some poor schmuck just sit down and start getting peppered with 10 second snippets of music looking for differences is not exactly what I'd call a well constructed test.

You say some interesting stuff here. I am reminded of one of my favorite photo enhancement programs, a plugin for Photoshop CS4 by a company called OnOne software that lets you see, on the same screen, before and after changes to your photo. Some are very subtle but can easily be seen when both views are on screen and are very hard to note when one shifts between screens only seeing one view at a time.

The problem with double blind is in one only hearing (seeing) one view at a time and it is almost always a short view on an unfamiliar system with unfamiliar music.