advertisement


Anyone tried blind testing DACs?

Purité Audio said:
Not just your head Sue, everyone goes into ‘critical’ mode when asked to compare something it is often why you hear something for the first time when comparing only to find that the same artefact is there on your usual system.
Unsighted comparison is just a useful way of deciding whether there is a difference between two components.
Click to expand...
Again, thank you for your insight into my own head space, Keith. I actually think there are at least three modes I detect in myself, not just the two you allude to here. That's why I mentioned three in the post you replied to earlier.

And unsighted comparisons are just a useful way of deciding whether there is an audible difference between two components, when listening in 'critical' mode. It says nothing about whether there's a difference in 'relaxed' mode. You know, that mode that lets you decide whether you can listen all night, or whether that initially impressive speaker becomes tiresome after an hour. The mode that only shows up when you've lived with a component for a while, and you find yourself listening more/less frequently, listening to different genres, and so on. The mode that you can't predict from unsighted listening. Because 'critical' mode is different to 'having fun listening to music' mode.

So why would you use one method to rule in or out a product which you intend to listen to in the other mode? You might easily rule out a product which, on extended, relaxed listening, would be just the ticket.
 
h.g. said:
As I mentioned above I am perfectly well aware that conversation in threads like this has pretty much zero chance of getting science across to the audiophile faithful which is why I was suggesting you tried to design a scientific experiment yourself to help understand how it works. If you are interested it might get a bit further by hopefully removing the attack from outside the tribe response inevitably present in threads like this. Unlike some objective audiophile missionary types I feel no great need to convert you to the path of truth and light but I am curious about what supports the audiophile faith given the continual drip, drip, drip of reality pushing against it.
Click to expand...
I might point out that this post is a pretty good example of what you describe as 'attack from outside the tribe'. Just look at the sort of words and phrases you have used, and tell me this post isn't dripping with prejudice and underlying disdain.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Again, thank you for your insight into my own head space, Keith. I actually think there are at least three modes I detect in myself, not just the two you allude to here. That's why I mentioned three in the post you replied to earlier.

And unsighted comparisons are just a useful way of deciding whether there is an audible difference between two components, when listening in 'critical' mode. It says nothing about whether there's a difference in 'relaxed' mode. You know, that mode that lets you decide whether you can listen all night, or whether that initially impressive speaker becomes tiresome after an hour. The mode that only shows up when you've lived with a component for a while, and you find yourself listening more/less frequently, listening to different genres, and so on. The mode that you can't predict from unsighted listening. Because 'critical' mode is different to 'having fun listening to music' mode.

So why would you use one method to rule in or out a product which you intend to listen to in the other mode? You might easily rule out a product which, on extended, relaxed listening, would be just the ticket.
Click to expand...
The point of an unsighted comparison is to determine whether there is an audible difference between two components that is it, you can listen in relaxed mode, you can swop inputs quickly or listen at length, the only important factors are that levels be matched ( if necessary ) and that you do not know which component you are listening to.
Once you have ascertained there is a difference then you can decide at your leisure which you prefer.
Keith
 
Yup no point in banging on,
‘The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool’

Keith
 
I'm an objectivist, in the sense that any real difference ought to be audible under level matched blind conditions. But objectivists are missing the point - home audio from the POV of most consumers - and most manufacturers - is not a scientific research programme, but a hobby. People buy into foo because they enjoy it. And it really doesn't matter.
 
sideshowbob said:
I'm an objectivist, in the sense that any real difference ought to be audible under level matched blind conditions. But objectivists are missing the point - home audio from the POV of most consumers - and most manufacturers - is not a scientific research programme, but a hobby. People buy into foo because they enjoy it. And it really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
Really doesn’t matter, you would enjoy this for example, knowing that it won’t make the slightest difference?
http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/shunyata-research-delta-nr-v2-power-cord/

Keith
 
Top reply from Sideshow Bob.

I am fundamentally a subjective consumer who loves music, and I like the gear too. I have 'seen the light' and pay far more attention to the measured performance of kit.

This allows me to make more informed decisions about what to buy or demo, in order to subjectively assess it. I seem to like the stuff best that is well engineered. Perhaps that is an influence/bias in itself? In which case it is a good one.
 
sideshowbob said:
I'm an objectivist, in the sense that any real difference ought to be audible under level matched blind conditions. But objectivists are missing the point - home audio from the POV of most consumers - and most manufacturers - is not a scientific research programme, but a hobby. People buy into foo because they enjoy it. And it really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The idea of getting all het up over boxes and wires is bizarre. Especially in this weather.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
I might point out that this post is a pretty good example of what you describe as 'attack from outside the tribe'. Just look at the sort of words and phrases you have used, and tell me this post isn't dripping with prejudice and underlying disdain.
Click to expand...
Of course we belong to different tribes and have faith in different things. You may have to expand on the prejudice but obviously when it comes to matters that lie in the scientific domain like sound perception nobody from the engineering/scientific tribe is going to have a high opinion of many of the fanciful audiophile notions on the subject. They may be intrigued but will not assign them much significance.

There is perhaps a difference though in reacting to attacks from outside the tribe. Scientists and engineers tend to have a high confidence in established scientific knowledge and this is by design an independent external quantity. Attacking established scientific knowledge isn't generally felt as an attack on the self. This tends to be different with audiophiles where believing in various notions that often fail scientific scrutiny seems to form part of the faith in being an audiophile. Attacks on that faith do seem to be felt more personally but it does seem to help bind the tribe together as can be seen in the more extreme examples like the Naim/Linn flat earth/PRAT stuff which in even the naming seems to positively invite attacks from non-believers.
 
I'm with Bob here, people are want to like all manner of foo and distortions, and good for them, they keep the rest of the industry going.

But thats far away from the new poster who comes on and asks, "what's the best xyz for the money", thats a simple what measures best answer, not a whats more popular question.

Very different things.
 
Hg,
You can make a scientific test that's good from the point of view of "double blinding".

That does not help if everything else about the test is crap. What is the ambient noise in the room? What recordings? Are the listeners comfortable and have they been given X hours to familiarise themselves with the system/room? Is each listener not being asked to participate in more than (say) four rounds of comparison per (say) day? Do we have enough participants to make that work? What is the state of the listeners' hearing? There are probably many more important aspects to consider!

Failure to dispove the null hypothesis is of no scientific value unless everything else about the test is spot on. It's not sufficient for it to be double blind.

This is what we have no chance of doing at home.

What we can do is listen double-blind at home and if we can't disprove null hypothesis blind, but we hear huge differences sighted, that helps! It suggests bias in our sighted perception. That's very useful knowledge, and that's why I encourage blind tests.

But it doesn't - it cannot - scientifically prove that no difference is audible because it's an amateur test.

Yes all the same problems plague sighted tests as well. This means certainty is beyond our grasp at home. I want to know why people think certainty must be possible in every situation.

High degree of certainty must be earned, which is why gold-standard scientific trials are a big deal.
 
Last edited:
Is this not all a bit pointless?
I have certainly always purchased hifi based on sound, look & feel of a product.
If a customer came into my shop wanting to be blindfolded etc i probably would point them to the nearest asylum.
Critical listening is not a good way of evaluating kit imho.
Measurements also will not tell you the whole story.
Take it on home demo for a few weeks and see if it is worth the outlay.
To me that would be more musical enjoyment across my catalogue of precious music.
If you find yourself looking for hifi adjectives to explain your choices and write a glowing review immediately chances are we will see it in the classifieds 6 months from now.
 
I just go with what Robert says about stuff like this, amps and that. He's been around a long time and knows about boxes with wires in. Never gets in a row, makes his point and leaves people to it. Not flogging owt, not precious, works for me. Thanks Robert.
 
Last edited:
Curtis said:
Is this not all a bit pointless?
I have certainly always purchased hifi based on sound, look & feel of a product.
If a customer came into my shop wanting to be blindfolded etc i probably would point them to the nearest asylum.
Critical listening is not a good way of evaluating kit imho.
Measurements also will not tell you the whole story.
Take it on home demo for a few weeks and see if it is worth the outlay.
To me that would be more musical enjoyment across my catalogue of precious music.
If you find yourself looking for hifi adjectives to explain your choices and write a glowing review immediately chances are we will see it in the classifieds 6 months from now.
Click to expand...
Hifi forums are asylums. It can be tricky working out who are staff and who are patients.

As for the rest of your post, spot on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top