I didn't come to this site convinced everything sounded different and was indoctrinated. I have always found nothing of the differences that seemed obvious to many. So much so that I had convinced myself that I had very poor ears. This site just made me think that perhaps I'm simply less sensitive to self-induced suggestion than many (and maybe I also have poor ears).
There are many factors at play.
Hearing itself and certainly reaction to music and recorded and played back music are learned.
What we prioritise in Sound is also a personal thing.
I have friends that totally appreciate the sound quality of my gear but are happy to listen to their favourite music on the crummiest and crappiest possible gear (below lo-fi, possibly below no-fi if possible). This is one of the reasons why "quality audio" is a minority concern. Education of such individuals to listen differently is possible of course. All of my WAG's turned into - not audiophiles, but individuals more concerned about sound quality after spending a lot of time with me and with a higher end sound system.
Hearing in music, what we focus on also differs.
For example, for me English is a third language mainly acquired after I was already an adult. So I often have issues with spoken english (or more precisely sung english). I also happen to be a quite lyrics focused listener when it comes to music (not that I don't get instrumental only music).
This leads me to prioritise "clarity" and "low room reverb" in my system setups, it helps intelligibility. An mild upper midrange boost that also can help is a no-no for me, as I am quite sensitive in this region and at high frequencies. When I was younger and FM Stereo was a thing the pilot tone residue used to drive me crazy, unitil I retrofitted a pilot tone filter to my Tuner. I also like a "full but tight" bass, not basshead levels. So my systems tends to also have a "darker" tonal balance and more "colour saturation", which of course impairs subjective clarity.
So I am listening in certain ways.
If I focus on where my perception is weakest and where I am most offended by flaws. If I do a test, I use music that challenging and that I know. A recording that has strong sibilants without being harsh easily flips to harshness and excessive sibilants. I also react strongly to bass / drums phrasing and emphasis.
Funnily, one of my litmus test recordings for systems is
The Dhol Foundation "Drummers Reel". I often went to Southall Gurdwara and experienced this kind of music live, direct and unamplified. It is loud, rauchous, at the edge of becoming uncomfortable, but just at the edge. The recording can sound the same way. On most systems it does not. And speakers/room are not the sole factors.
I'm not interested in defending one thesis or the other, I'm only interested in knowing what I can really hear and what not.
There are a number of websites where you can listen for example to level differences or distortion blind and see what you can hear. It can be eyeopening.
There is no truth that makes me more comfortable than the other, I don't sell audio products.
Neither do I. I used to design them, but I don't sell them (there is a difference).
just hearing a difference with my own ears can change my mind. There were tons of tests on this site that I could run (not just ABX which you hate) that let me find out what I can and can't hear. For me it was rehearsal, without much narrative behind it. Trivial tests to perform.
First, ignorance is bliss. Perhaps best you do not try starting to "hear things". Enjoy the blissful state that everything sounds the same to you and buy the cheapest gear.
If it works for you that last thing I'd want to do is infect you with audiophilia nervosa.
Do you have a serious test to propose to me to make me hear that there are actually differences that I can hear between two medium-level DACs? all my tests carried out told me the opposite.
The first question, do we have reason to expect the " two medium-level DAC's" should sound different?
Say we are (for arguments sake) comparing a bunch of Dongles using ESS "System on Chip" combo's that integrate everything on one chip and feed the headphone directly from the Chip and are all manufacturers datasheet circuits in different boxes, should we expect to hear differences, unless one item is obviously defective (may be design)?
And yes I am aware that in the subjective audio space there are massive meta threads doing such comparisons and hearing differences. Well, I do not hear them.
So if there no reason whatsoever to expect a difference, should we test to her one anyway?
To me all the various (different objective performance) ESS chip's sound the same and anything I head that was made with them also sounded the same.
Now next question, can you demonstrate in other tests that use known general audible fidelity impairments that you have the ability to distinguish them from the unimpaired case?
Third question, if we are using AABX (Audio ABX per Clark/Krueger/Nousaine et al) testing, can you having demonstrated suitable hearing acuity using other tests overcome the "shell game" aspect of the Test? If not using AABX but a sensible protocol (many are documented) proceed to the actual test, phase one (usually familiarisation and listener training).
Fourth question, if using AABX and you passed three, can you still perform after having beein intentionally been biased towards the outcome of the test, that is rather "let's see what I can hear" (e.g. level differences) you are being told you are switching between the same cables one set on ebony woof cable lifters and the other on ceramic cable lifters while in fact you are presented with a test you previously passed, without being intentionally biased, can you still hear the previously reliably detected difference? If so proceed to the actual test, phase one (usually familiarisation and listener training).
Note, I have not given you any specific test, what I have given you is the protocol to figure out if you should actually bother with further testing.
Once you have done these and I actually STRONGLY RECOMMEND you do 3 & 4 which validate if an AABX test can work for you at all or not, you will have a much better idea how to approach listening test.
I often actually wonder how many of those who mention AABX testing especially have ever done these steps.
Or at least spend weekends in a listening room at HiFi Mag's listening room doing 8 hours paid blind listening as "expert listener"
Or modified a product that they felt sounded different and better than stock and, while sitting in a SIGHTED group listening test against the same unit stock, finding they cannot hear ANY difference, but then find that everyone clearly heard differences and described them without prompting in a similar language and ask for details of what was done?
I find that have smoke you either have fire or a smoke machine. I encountered a lot of smoke. Personally. Just saying.
Thor
.
