I've said that our "eyes" influence the perception of sound (quotes indicating "eyes" is a stand in not only for the visual influence of a product, but the general "knowledge" that we are comparing two different products, or any other things we are told, or know, that can influence our perception).
I'm not sure why you are challenging this obvious point.
That's something exactly opposite to what rational people know to be true.
I'm very surprised to see a science-oriented person say that. There are reems of studies showing how various factors affect our perception - in taste, vision, sound etc. I'm sure you are aware of many studies done on influencing the subjective taste of wine, for instance the influence of price on subjective assesment of taste:
https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/wine-study-shows-price-influences-perception-1374
Yes we use our tastebuds for tasting. But the subjective taste, or assessment of that taste, can be a combination of influences. Same with sound.
But you can't escape from the reality that you can ONLY characterize the sound ears-only. Your "perception" of the sound when peeking is meaningless,
No it's not. It's a real experience. So it has plenty of meaning to the person. The issue is how that experience is INTERPRETED.
If for instance I tested a boutique AC cable against a cheap stock AC cable I may have the subjective impression that the more expensive, prettier one, which I've been told is "objectively superior in performance" seems to make the system sound better. "Listen to that added richness, smoothness, depth!"
Now...the subjective experience is real. The problem comes from how we interpret it. If I just infer from my subjective experience that it's due to the AC cables actually CHANGING the physical sound of the system, then that can be totally in error, and this is subject to empirical checking via blind testing and measurements. I can then find out that my subjective impression was not caused by any actual audible change to the system, so it must be do to some other factors - bias or whatever. And this is knowledge-gained-as-power. It helps make an informed choice about buying AC cables: if your goal is to ACTUALLY alter the sound of the system, then spending money on the boutique cable will be misspent.
But you can always decide "you know what? I just seem to like the system better when I have that nice looking cable in the mix." Just accept the influence of bias...but knowingly...and not under the misapprehension of what's going on, nor misleading anyone else about what's going on.
so claims of an amplifier or DAC or whatever sounding "detailed" or "bright" or "refulgent" or whatever MUST be backed up with ears-only evaluation, otherwise they fall into the "alien abductions with anal probing" category. It's playing make-believe.
Yes. And No. For the reasons above. Yes, ears-only/blind testing helps identify what is happening in purely audible terms. But if other factors influence how something sounds to us in sighted conditions, those are real world factors that do alter the experience. Being rigorous helps us distinguish these variables...but the variables exist, and how anyone wants to juggle those variables in his own purchase is up to them, and it can be reasonable to include the variables in one's choice.