Blind Test BS?

[DrWho]

The all

amps sound the same when not stressed phrase is pure BS and a gross

lie.

Yet it is also more true than it is false...[]

Have

you compared A/B speakers(any make as long as they are quite full range

and can extend down in the 30's) with a receiver(a high quality one for

fairness sake) VS a high quality solid state amp like a Bryston?

The control of tyhe Bryston and the very very clear improved control in the bass is very very real.

In

the real world amps are all stressed to a point and performance will

deviate from the ideal faster in the lower class products.

To me all these so called blind tests are worth a big fat 0

Short answer = yes. What volume levels do you want to discuss?

Distortion levels increase exponentially with volume so by turning it

down you are naturally making the distortion in both systems closer to

each other.

But my comments are made in light of the big picture.

Things like what goes on in the recording studio.

And not all cheap receivers are made equal - take for example the older Harmon Kardon HK _30 series.

Ultimately it comes down to whether or not the enjoyment of the music

is actually improved. It's still the same song and if I enjoy the song

it shouldn't really matter which nuance is where - especially when the

next recording is going to require a different set of nuances to be

"perfect" (whatever that means).

And then there is the issue of acoustics...so many people are chucking

thousands of dollars into electronics commenting on little changes when

they're listening in a crappy environment. I understand that some

people are unable to improve their acoustical situation, but $3k can go

a long way in aesthetically acceptable changes. I would totally take a

Denon + Synergy F3 system in an acoustically 'correct' room over a full

blown heritage setup in a poor acoustical environment. [] It really

makes that big of a difference. Better yet, I would prefer a system

custom built around the 'correct' acoustics...in other words, any

product you can purchase on the market has been optomized for the

'general case' which is very much not the ideal situation...

[ottscay]

One thing I cherish about my girlfriend is she is a trained musician, and has a really good ear. So she has taken a strong interest in the hobby, and even partcipated in evaluating speakers for my last upgrade. We both "hear" the same thing, in the sense that we both notice differences, but she is usually far more adept at identifying what that difference is.

[thebes]

To me the whole problem with the concept of a blind test is it's duration.

Once you get past a certain level of quality, it's only time that

reveals the beauty or the beast of a component, speaker or

system. And then, of course, only if you are paying attention.

[Fish]

I'm not ashamed to admit I don't have a "golden"ear,although I can hear.I gotta say though that the difference in pre/pros sound is very obvious to me.I've auditioned quite a few in my house and they all sounded different,some only lasted an hour or so,some took weeks.When it comes to similar ss amps I agree with thebes,it takes me a while to hear/appeciate the difference.

[TheEAR]

No respected "audiophile" will ever use a puny cheapo amp not capable doubling its output until a short is reached. []

I only buy the amp with the giant torroidal transformer and caps as large as soda cans. [] I like speakers that stress the cheap amps and present the most difficult load,unmasking the lesser amp for what it is,mass market pile O junk.

A/B tests the mags do,they can all put them where the sun does not shine.To me its what makes me happy,brings the musical message home that gets my hard earned $$$$$.

Audiophool and proud of it.

[djk]

"Choosing the "best" (or better) is purely subjective. "

Pull the other leg, please.

Most people have heard a real piano, and/or an acoustic guitar. The system should re-create this, it is not 'subjective'.

Once you have a good neutral system, program material may be altered to your 'subjective' taste.

[Jay481985]

"Choosing the "best" (or better) is purely subjective. "

Pull the other leg, please.

Most people have heard a real piano, and/or an acoustic guitar. The system should re-create this, it is not 'subjective'.

Once you have a good neutral system, program material may be altered to your 'subjective' taste.

That is true and when I brought the rf-83 one of my first subjective test was to play a Sarah Chang CD which has the violin. I played the violin when I was in Middle School and know how it sounds so that was my reference. I also did this to other speakers before the rf-83

[sfogg]

"

No respected "audiophile" will ever use a puny cheapo amp not capable doubling its output until a short is reached."

Guess there are no respected 'audiophile's with tube amps then.....

Shawn

[Def Leper]

"Choosing the "best" (or better) is purely subjective. "

Pull the other leg, please.

Most people have heard a real piano, and/or an acoustic guitar. The system should re-create this, it is not 'subjective'.

Once you have a good neutral system, program material may be altered to your 'subjective' taste.

You're living in a dream world. I've heard literally thousands of music systems and have never heard a single one that can accurately reproduce (you say recreate) the sound of a complex instrument like the piano sitting in the same space. Not one, and that includes some systems that cost as much as a house. Some are bad, some are good, and some are outstanding, but none come close to the real thing. If you think they can, you need to get out and listen to real instruments.

I'll repeat. Choosing the best (or better) is purely subjective. Your choice may not match mine, for many different reasons.

[oldbuckster]

Choosing the Best is purely subjective, there is no way around that statement. Speakers come to mind, a new set of speakers might sound really good today with the volume cranked up, but over a couple of weeks time, and at Normal listening levels, they don't sound the same, but when you brought them home they were the Best, what happened? The rush of a new set of speakers, you gotta crank them to hear them, then the reality sets in that you can't play them at that volume all the time, so back you go to normal listening levels, and they don't sound as good. A/B testing in a showroom, that is a bad idea. Are your speakers going to be played in that same room all the time, NO. Is that showroom set-up to show off "the speaker of the month", Yes. It seems most people will take the loudest speaker in a A/B test in a showroom. Loudest doesn't mean Best, but you can't tell them that.

It's what sounds best to your ears, in your listening room, playing Music you like to hear, at volumes you normally listen to. Other peoples opinions are a good form of information in helping you decide what to purchase, but the money comes out of your wallet, and the final choice is yours. I think this applies to Receivers too, or most any piece of Hi-Fi equipment. Time to me is the real test, not a spur of the moment decision.

[Deang]

"I've heard literally thousands of music systems and have never heard a single one that can accurately reproduce (you say recreate) the sound of a complex instrument like the piano sitting in the same space. Not one, and that includes some systems that cost as much as a house."

It's doubtful you've heard "thousands" of systems. At any rate, a good horn system has no trouble recreating the sound of a piano or any other instrument, and on those systems -- success or failure is largely dependant on the recording quality.

[Spkrdctr]

Anyoone who says blind testing is BS has no clue what they are talking about. It sperates fact from fiction very quickly. The problem is that most people have not been involved with blind testing, yet they get on a website and talk about it. Oh well... thats the internet! The testing has shown that power cords and speaker wires are pretty much all the same. Speakers are the easiest to pick out and make the biggest difference in a system.

[Jay481985]

Didn't I read somewhere in a magazine once where the writer was actually correct in saying that the speakers are the most important thing to getting good sound? (minus room because each room is subjective) I mean the way most cable companies and snakeoil companies put their product is like the next best thing to sliced bread. In the scientific world, especially in labs there is always a better way or better theoretical method but what comes down to it is how much is it and how much of an improvement do I get. A price per improvement ratio. I mean people do not redo their kitchen just because it can be improved a modest 1% or so. Also the writer went on to say that you should not skimp out on the speakers but you can skimp a little on the amplifer since you can replace them easier.

A/B testing does have its qualities but it is not the ends all to the means imho.

[Fish]

Anyoone who says blind testing is BS has no clue what they are talking about. It sperates fact from fiction very quickly. The problem is that most people have not been involved with blind testing, yet they get on a website and talk about it.

I just wanted to make clear,I have no issue with blind(or anykind)of testing.My complaint was a few newbies with preconceived notions about low/hi fi equipment sounds the same,its just a money scam etc..doin' "blind test".Then this info is spread around to other newbies,not that I care so much but as a thread here mentioned,the "dumbing down"of audio gear/sources don't help music lovers.My question/statement here was more about"I can hear the difference in pre/pro/avrs,almost all of em'(except maybe $119 avr comparison).These jokers were talkin' about doin blind test for speakers,unreal.

[colterphoto1]

From a statistical standpoint, almost none of this hi-fi 'testing' holds any water. There are very specific rules that must be followed and quite a bit of heavy duty math involved in determining whether the outcome from testing can be relied upon.

I routinely dismiss most of this testing as being nearly completly unscientific despite the many attempts involved at being fair and impartial.

Read a good statistics text and then try some testing.

Michael

[Deang]

I found that if you read books on statistics while you're testing -- things come out better.

[DrWho]

At any rate, a good horn system has no trouble recreating the sound of a piano...

Oh wow, I'll have to greatly beg to differ on that one...but let's not go there []

[Jay481985]

meh pianos can hit 20 hertz and the horn diameter would be outrageous for a 20 hertz horn..... Also the piano is hard to produce as its a combination of strings, percussion, etc plus the thing vibrates as opposed to speakers that have a dead enclosure.

Also a/b testing is like having a professional violinist using a normal 4/4 violin of no particular brand and using a stardivarious. Most people will probably not notice anything but to a violinist and audiophile its like the difference of a yugo and ferrari. To each their own passion and the pursuit of the "best" in their hobby.

[Bill Cain]

Blind, schmind. LOL

The sweetest-sounding, cleanest amp I EVER used with my little HIP's was a Mistubishi 100w / ch unit, back in the seventies. It made the Heresys sound better than anything else I have ever used. Ever. No BS. One problem..... It had 5 different protection circuits in it. Great for the folks at home.....

But I used a parametric EQ to bump up the bass, a teensie weensie bit. [] So, when I'd start cranking it, the protect circuits clamped and there... went... the... beauty. Not good when people are dancing.

I only used it one night. Back then today's sub-woofers weren't even a fantasy. []

So, yes, you CAN here the differences in amps, pre-amps, mixers, EQ's, cartridges and even stylus's. And you don't have to be blind.

Now, cables.... don't make me laugh. They're the biggest (IMNSHO) scam in "Hi-Fi." Just get the biggest zip cord you can afford at Home Depot. lol

[oldbuckster]

Sub woofer in the 70's, only a very few top audiophiles even mentioned subs back then, not many people had them. Bill is right about some equipment that you can tell the difference right away, mixers, EQ's they could cause alot of probelms, and the main piece at the time, Cartridges, and stylus. Now before the vinyl guys jump me, you know I don't like vinyl, the Cartridge, to me, was the one piece of gear that could be noticed right away.The less expensive ones sounded ok until you spent a few dollars more and moved up the scale, and heard the better ones. The minute you changed a cartridge, and started to play vinyl you can tell the difference, instantly you would notice the highs, the better output, the smoothness, you know what I mean. I never cared for Shure, a very fragile stylus, and I just didn't like the sound as compared to a Stanton, Pickering, or my favorite Audio Technica. I don't know what is available for cartridges in today's market, but I bet there are some good choices.

Amps, Receivers, Speakers, I really feel that time is the best test. Yes, if you are going from an inexpensive unit, to say a Top of the line unit, you probably can tell right away, but if you compare 2 top of the line units, all things being the same, I don't think the majority of people can tell instantly which is best. Which I guess brings us back to; whatever sounds best to your ears is the only thing that matters.