Should blind testing discussion be banned on CA? POLL

Allan F · February 6, 2015

Most especially those who have a motto everything matters and everything sounds different...

You state this as if these two are inevitably intertwined. That is not correct. "Everything matters" does not mean that "everything sounds different". It means that each element may sound different and that is why they all matter. OTOH, everything may and can sound the same, too. That is why listening, as opposed to measuring, is essential.

esldude · February 6, 2015

I am not the one that thinks most C.A. members are gullible idiots with more money than sense.
You are the one that keeps hinting at that. Personally, I think that the vast majority of polls are ill conceived, a waste of time, and often lead to friction. If you really want to know, then you start another poll. I give most C.A. members far more credit than you apparently do.

You seem very good at putting nasty words in my mouth. Not trying to demonize someone with a different opinion are you?

esldude · February 6, 2015

You state this as if these two are inevitably intertwined. That is not correct. "Everything matters" does not mean that "everything sounds different". It means that each element may sound different and that is why they all matter. OTOH, everything may and can sound the same, too. That is why listening, as opposed to measuring, is essential.

Some have espoused both. Some espouse one or the other.

Allan F · February 6, 2015

You seem very good at putting nasty words in my mouth.

It's important to note that Alex did not write "the one that says most C.A. members..." IMO, his comment is a not unreasonable inference to be drawn from your posts and criticisms, although the substance of that inference could probably be phrased in a somewhat less personal and confrontational manner.

Audiophile Neuroscience · February 6, 2015

You seem very good at putting nasty words in my mouth.

I think AlexK needs to concede you do a very good job all by yourself ;-0

esldude · February 6, 2015

When I decide to buy a new component I generally follow something like the methodology you outlined. You narrow down the list and then begin your listening. Do you DBT the narrowed list of components? Say maybe 2 or 3 DACS that look interesting?

The reason I asked the question is the passionate arguments that are in these posts and if that translated into real world behavior. Thanks

I haven't DBT'd DAC purchases, but that is due to using a Tact Room EQ device with a DAC as part of the device for the last decade. The difference in using the Tact vs not is at least 10 times greater than any reasonable DAC. I have had a hand in friend's recent DAC purchases. They did not do any blind testing. Seems any reasonably good DAC should sound the same or very close to the same. Without the formal testing they have been happy with the results. I would have done some tests, but they are rather more like the majority on CA. Listen and see how you feel about it.

I have sent one fellow some files recorded off of more than one DAC, all of which he has heard and thought sounded different. No labels asking him to tell me which is which. He gave up and never gave a choice. If asked it clearly has given him pause for thought. Yet he doesn't wish to reorient his view of things I take it. I understand the feeling. If a direct experience becomes one you shake your head about for moment and then bury in memory how can you ever change someone's mind?

Allan F · February 6, 2015

Some have espoused both. Some espouse one or the other.

I don't recall anyone posting that they espoused both. Can you refresh my memory by citing an example?

esldude · February 6, 2015

It's important to note that Alex did not write "the one that says most C.A. members..." IMO, his comment is a not unreasonable inference to be drawn from your posts and criticisms, although the substance of that inference could probably be phrased in a somewhat less personal and confrontational manner.

I think it is a significant step to substitute , "gullible idiots" and "with more money than sense" for what I have said. It was done to make it look like I have disdain for those who disagree with me. If I had that literal opinion, I would not bother posting here at all.

esldude · February 6, 2015

I don't recall anyone posting that they espoused both. Can you refresh my memory by citing an example?

Right off hand no I can't.

sandyk · February 6, 2015

I think AlexK needs to concede you do a very good job all by yourself ;-0

One could possibly draw such conclusions from a signature like this:

I love the smell of snake oil in the morning.
It....smells......like........... money......

Perhaps the signatures should be more appropriate to the thread itself, or not included at all in some cases?

Allan F · February 6, 2015

I think it is a significant step to substitute , "gullible idiots" and "with more money than sense" for what I have said. It was done to make it look like I have disdain for those who disagree with me. If I had that literal opinion, I would not bother posting here at all.

Do you think merely "gullible" would be a fair substitution for what you have said? FWIW, I do.

esldude · February 6, 2015

Do you think merely "gullible" would be a fair substitution? FWIW, I do.

No I don't. I think members of CA are human. Not particularly gullible vs other humans.

Allan F · February 6, 2015

No I don't. I think members of CA are human. Not particularly gullible vs other humans.

If that is truly the case, then you should tone down your rhetoric. Because you certainly come across as if you think they are.

Teresa · February 6, 2015

Hi Teresa,
Well said on all counts.

To Fine's list " I don’t trust ABX/DBT protocols, I don’t trust name brands, I don’t trust price, I don’t trust measurements, I don’t trust reviewers, I don’t trust salespeople."

Thanks David! However I should clear something up, that is my list not Wilma Cozart Fine's list. The writing in purple is Wilma Cozart Fine's quote "Trust your ears." which I agree with. My list follows in indented grey.

I would add:

I *don’t absolutely trust* people who hear differences as I may not hear the same differences. I do keep an open mind and respect their experiences but seek to hear for myself.

I *absolutely don’t trust* people who cant hear differences as they simply may not have the required skillset (or gear). Sadly for them they may be in the wrong hobby but that is not for me to judge, just ponder.

I *absolutely distrust* manufacturers who claim their product does or *does not* produce audible differences ….until such time as I have heard the product. I intensely dislike the arrogance of any manufacturer who presumes to deny me of that opportunity.

Regarding the ABX DBT I would say, AFAIK, it has not been shown to be a "gold standard" test of determining differences for complex musical perceptions (as opposed to simple unimodal sensory modalities). Anyone who says it does should point to the references detailing the tests performance in such *quality measures* as sensitivity, specificity, reliability, validity, true/false positives, true/false negatives, positive and negative predictive values. Now if you don’t have a clue about these things but still blindly assert the legitimacy of the test then IMO you are an idiot, scientifically speaking that is. OTOH I, in truth, do not know that audio abx dbt will not be shown to be worthwhile one day if someone does the research. I highly, highly doubt it. Until such time it is useless and unintelligent to offer up an unproven testing method to incite arguments, IMO. There is just far too much pseudoscience peddled by anti-audiophiles using tests that do not count and measuring surrogate values as if they were the measure of the real thing or thinking they have established a causal correlation. Complete nonsense. Until then, like all good audiophiles I will trust my ears every time. My ears in conjunction with my brain assess the only outcome I am interested in, musical appreciation.

I agree with all of the above.

Sorry to hear about your chronic pain problem. I do treat chronic pain and entrenched pain states are a complex problem. Like audio there are physical and psychological influences affecting *all of us* (The IASP defines pain as both a physical and emotional experience). What we have learnt about the neurobiology of pain, central sensitisation in conjunction with neuroplasticity changes in the peripheral and central nervous system, points to a multidisciplinary/multimodal approach to management. In many/most instances it appears the usual dishinhibitory neural pathways are not functioning properly. The cruel twist is the more the focus and attention the worse it gets, the harder you try to beat it the more likely to fail. It is counter intuitive to have to learn not to try so hard in a (western) world that typically promotes a 'fight, fight and never give in' approach to life. "Letting go' is an alien concept for some and I have had patients say " I try very hard to let go" thus failing before they start. I sometimes give the analogy that you cant force yourself to go to sleep. You setup the necessary conditions and simply let it happen. This is all rather too simplistic and philosophical, and I know nothing of your circumstances, just to say it forms the basis of one of the traps or barriers to further chronic pain rehabilitation. I stress I am talking generally about chronic pain states not specifically about your pain. YMMV.

Cheers

David

Thanks for your concern and kind words. I have nerve damage due to multiple head injuries coupled with back pain due to degenerative disc disease, I take many prescription pain relievers for the types of pain which deaden it for a while but never eliminates it. That coupled with dementia which makes just day to day activities extremely hard.

jriver · February 6, 2015

If that is truly the case, then you should tone down your rhetoric. Because you certainly come across as if you think they are.

I don't see a problem with his rhetoric. What do you object to?

Allan F · February 6, 2015

I don't see a problem with his rhetoric. What do you object to?

Why am I not surprised that you would intervene with your 2 cents, Jim? Given the self-serving arrogance that you have displayed on numerous occasions, I fully understand why you wouldn't see a problem.

petaluma · February 6, 2015

Originally Posted by Superdad No it should not be banned, but it also should not hijack threads where people are discussing listening experiences and differences they say they do hear.

Some DBT proponents can be like rude guests who crash a wine tasting party and insist that unless everybody puts on a blindfold and conforms to rigorous procedure then they are all deluding themselves and that there opinions on which wines taste better are just worthless anecdotes. Never mind that half the people there are vintners and the other half are sommeliers with decades of experience. Such incidents can become a big turnoff to new people just discovering fine wine tasting.

Alex, I was fortunate enough a number of years ago to attend blind tastings with a friend who was a member of the Vintners Club in San Francisco. I remember one tasting in particular that produced some interesting results. Tastings were blind with 12 wines. Syrahs I believe this time. There were 2 winemakers at our table. Signorello and Livingston, both in Napa, both with wines in the tasting. There was also a wine writer at our table. When the tastings were completed both winemakers had rated their own wines #1 out of the twelve. Pretty good taste memory. The wine writer's # 1 wine was uniformly in the bottom third of everyone at the table. Needless to say I tended to take his reviews in the future with a grain of salt.

Superdad · February 6, 2015

I *don’t absolutely trust* people who hear differences as I may not hear the same differences. I do keep an open mind and respect their experiences but seek to hear for myself.

I *absolutely don’t trust* people who cant hear differences as they simply may not have the required skillset (or gear). Sadly for them they may be in the wrong hobby but that is not for me to judge, just ponder.

I *absolutely distrust* manufacturers who claim their product does or *does not* produce audible differences ….until such time as I have heard the product. I intensely dislike the arrogance of any manufacturer who presumes to deny me of that opportunity.

Regarding the ABX DBT I would say, AFAIK, it has not been shown to be a "gold standard" test of determining differences for complex musical perceptions (as opposed to simple unimodal sensory modalities). Anyone who says it does should point to the references detailing the tests performance in such *quality measures* as sensitivity, specificity, reliability, validity, true/false positives, true/false negatives, positive and negative predictive values. Now if you don’t have a clue about these things but still blindly assert the legitimacy of the test then IMO you are an idiot, scientifically speaking that is. OTOH I, in truth, do not know that audio abx dbt will not be shown to be worthwhile one day if someone does the research. I highly, highly doubt it. Until such time it is useless and unintelligent to offer up an unproven testing method to incite arguments, IMO. There is just far too much pseudoscience peddled by anti-audiophiles using tests that do not count and measuring surrogate values as if they were the measure of the real thing or thinking they have established a causal correlation. Complete nonsense. Until then, like all good audiophiles I will trust my ears every time. My ears in conjunction with my brain assess the only outcome I am interested in, musical appreciation.

Bravo David!

Superdad · February 6, 2015

Seems any reasonably good DAC should sound the same or very close to the same. ...

I have sent one fellow some files recorded off of more than one DAC, all of which he has heard and thought sounded different.

Gosh Dennis, with those two sentences you have given us a much clearer picture of your views and aural comprehension.

Maybe when my father wants a new hi-def flat screen TV I'll video a few in the store and send him the file to watch on his old TV.

Superdad · February 6, 2015

The wine writer's # 1 wine was uniformly in the bottom third of everyone at the table. Needless to say I tended to take his reviews in the future with a grain of salt.

Or at least drink the wines he recommends with some actual grains of salt.

Tone Deaf · February 6, 2015

I have sent one fellow some files recorded off of more than one DAC, all of which he has heard and thought sounded different. No labels asking him to tell me which is which. He gave up and never gave a choice. If asked it clearly has given him pause for thought. Yet he doesn't wish to reorient his view of things I take it. I understand the feeling. If a direct experience becomes one you shake your head about for moment and then bury in memory how can you ever change someone's mind?

Interesting, but not conclusive. The only conclusions that can be drawn was that the fellow was unable to tell differences between recordings of different DACs recorded with your (I assume) equipment. Did the DACs really sound the same, or did the recording chain obscure the differences between the DACs? I would be curious how the recording chain was eliminated from influencing the test. IMO DBTs can be useful, however difficulties arise when attempts are made to draw conclusions beyond the scope of the original test.

Paul

Paul R · February 6, 2015

I haven't DBT'd DAC purchases, but that is due to using a Tact Room EQ device with a DAC as part of the device for the last decade. The difference in using the Tact vs not is at least 10 times greater than any reasonable DAC. I have had a hand in friend's recent DAC purchases. They did not do any blind testing. Seems any reasonably good DAC should sound the same or very close to the same. Without the formal testing they have been happy with the results. I would have done some tests, but they are rather more like the majority on CA. Listen and see how you feel about it.

I have sent one fellow some files recorded off of more than one DAC, all of which he has heard and thought sounded different. No labels asking him to tell me which is which. He gave up and never gave a choice. If asked it clearly has given him pause for thought. Yet he doesn't wish to reorient his view of things I take it. I understand the feeling. If a direct experience becomes one you shake your head about for moment and then bury in memory how can you ever change someone's mind?

[wisecracking bronx accent, accented by chewing gum]

Yada yada yada - you got controlled lab grade DBTs to back up those opinions there fella? OR you just flappin' your choppers for effect?

Seems to me you might be a real hard case- everyone is wrong but you and they just can't seem to see it? Seriously- you really wanna play *that* card chum? [/wbaabcg]

esldude · February 6, 2015

Interesting, but not conclusive. The only conclusions that can be drawn was that the fellow was unable to tell differences between recordings of different DACs recorded with your (I assume) equipment. Did the DACs really sound the same, or did the recording chain obscure the differences between the DACs? I would be curious how the recording chain was eliminated from influencing the test. IMO DBTs can be useful, however difficulties arise when attempts are made to draw conclusions beyond the scope of the original test.

Paul

Never said it was conclusive. Just described what happened. Was practical to send files from more than one DAC blind this way.

He had in his system heard two of the DACs and thought they were obviously different. I used a good measuring and sounding AD to record with. Not state of the art, but not a piece of junk. One can always wonder if the recording device obscured differences. Having heard it record and playback something vs something straight in it is clear the device does not do major damage to the signal. I of course cannot with 100% certainty say the device used for recording did not influence the outcome. Two "obviously" different DAC's weren't so different this way.

esldude · February 6, 2015

[wisecracking bronx accent, accented by chewing gum]

Yada yada yada - you got controlled lab grade DBTs to back up those opinions there fella? OR you just flappin' your choppers for effect?

Seems to me you might be a real hard case- everyone is wrong but you and they just can't seem to see it? Seriously- you really wanna play *that* card chum? [/wbaabcg]

Nope got no lab grade results sorry. Not claiming these are either. Do think they might cause some self reflection if you were that person. Besides I never said the other guy was wrong in this instance. You guys are maybe who would say he is wrong because they didn't sound different. Not me.

Paul R · February 6, 2015

Nope got no lab grade results sorry. Not claiming these are either. Do think they might cause some self reflection if you were that person. Besides I never said the other guy was wrong in this instance. You guys are maybe who would say he is wrong because they didn't sound different. Not me.

LOL! I am only pulling your chain a bit Dennis. I don't think it was me- might have been. I love this stuff, but if I don't note it in my journal, I am likely to forget or be foggy on the details after a few years.

In any case, it really is anecdotal - and is not hard evidence for or against I think.

Glad to see you loosening up a bit and relaxing. This is supposed to be fun you know!

Should blind testing discussion be banned on CA? POLL

Should blind testing discussion be banned on CA? 84 members have voted

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Should blind testing discussion be banned on CA?
84 members have voted