Blind test: we have a volunteer!!!

[Beershaun]

I have 10 devices with amps.

I have two 5.1 setups and 4 stereo setups.

Do I hear different between amps? Yes.

Do I want to do double blinds tests, sure, I would love to join one you host in the future...Do I want to do it in my home, nah....Having already done two double blinds tests for DAC already took too much out of my family members. : P

Regarding hearing....Can you pass at least 0.5db sound different online test at https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=0.5?

My test results are here
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/how-good-is-your-hearing.20417/post-692530

I ain't paying for 0.5db difference. I wanna hear stuff that was wasn't there at all.

 

[richard12511]

I have 10 devices with amps.

I have two 5.1 setups and 4 stereo setups.

Do I hear different between amps? Yes.

Do I want to do double blinds tests, sure, I would love to join one you host in the future...Do I want to do it in my home, nah....Having done two double blinds tests for DAC already took too much out of my family members. : P

Regarding hearing....Can you pass at least 0.5db sound different online test at https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=0.5?

My test results are here
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/how-good-is-your-hearing.20417/post-692530

I don't know whether this particular blind test will ever take place, but the whole thread has got me really interested in trying one out for myself.

I'd like to use my NC1200, and AVR, and an amp that almost certainly sounds different. Was thinking the Pass ACA amp reviewed here, but suggestions from @restorer-john would also be welcomed.

 

[Blaspheme]

I have 10 devices with amps.

I have two 5.1 setups and 4 stereo setups.

Do I hear different between amps? Yes.

Do I want to do double blinds tests, sure, I would love to join one you host in the future...Do I want to do it in my home, nah....Having done two double blinds tests for DAC already took too much out of my family members. : P

Regarding hearing....Can you pass at least 0.5db sound different online test at https://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_level.php?lvl=0.5?

My test results are here
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/how-good-is-your-hearing.20417/post-692530

That was interesting. For me, 3 dB was easy. 1 dB was harder going up (down is fine) but I pass. The 0.5 dB, not so much: down yes, up vs flat, no. I'm 63 though. Or 64, I've stopped counting. Like I said, 1 up is harder.

As for amps, I'd say I've heard difference. [deleted tangent] Would I AB/ABX if I still had the amps and someone lent me a comparator (or I could hire one)? Yes, I'm sufficiently curious. I'll see if I come across a difference again, I'd like more amp channels at some stage.

 

[restorer-john]

I'd like to use my NC1200, and AVR, and an amp that almost certainly sounds different. Was thinking the Pass ACA amp reviewed here, but suggestions from @restorer-john would also be welcomed.

Level match all your amplifiers at 1kHz electrically at the speaker terminals when running into the same pair of speakers. Make sure they are also channel to channel balanced (L/R) as that is a huge giveaway when the image shifts a tiny bit. By all means switch in as many speakers as you can (if your comparator allows it)

Then use your front end/preamp/DAC whatever to give you varying listening levels from quiet-loud. Any channel indifferences in the source/preamp are then common to all the amps.

Don't start of loud, start off very quietly, with low levels, listening for detail and bottom end differences between amplifiers initially. Take notes if you want to remind yourself next time. If you start off at a high level, your ears get de-sensitized IMO. Leave your loudest comparisons to the end and keep them short, especially if you are comparing a lot of amps. Take a break between. Keep it fun and not serious or you'll never do it again.

Turn around the amplifiers (or put something between you and the gear) so there are no cues (meters, O/L lights, dimming of panel lights, heat etc that can give you a clue). Sit far enough away from the tweeters that residual hiss doesn't betray which amp is which.

By all means put the ACA in there, but it will out in the first round IMO.

Make sure all you interconnects and speaker cables are freshly cut and stripped, the same length and all the same type. Otherwise people will jump up and down and complain.

 

[posvibes]

A few years ago I did a blind test with myself and a few friends(didn't have the ABX back then) between the Emotiva, the cheaper Nord, and one of the AVRs($400 Yamaha).

I have had two AVR products, both Pioneer, one was a VSX 5.1 thingy in early 2000 and other was a monster vintage top of the line VSX D1S. The latter I would put up against just about anything you could name in integrated amplifier mode and the former I became embarrassed about owning, although in Direct stereo mode I couldn't really say that it didn't perform ok.

I even ran it with my old Elac 3 ways which had a nominal impedance of 4ohm but according to the label on the back of the speakers was fine for amps of 8 & 4 ohm.

I was ashamed I couldn't hear a difference and have avoided AVR's ever since. A mate of mine while waiting for his amp to be repaired used a massive TEAC AVR with a massive set of Dynaudio speakers his built from a Dynaudio kit and I was stunned at how well the amp performed although he had his reservations about it again in stereo direct mode.

I sometimes wake up in a cold sweat thinking about my inability to detect a difference but then realize it is really my hair shirt that I wear as repentance for my non audiophile credentials and the fear of being found out.

 

[amirm]

Level match all your amplifiers at 1kHz electrically at the speaker terminals when running into the same pair of speakers. Make sure they are also channel to channel balanced (L/R) as that is a huge giveaway when the image shifts a tiny bit.

Shoot, that would be an easy give away as well in the test we are trying to do there.

 

[Spkrdctr]

I'm just shaking my head. Does anyone listen to the experts anymore? Where is JJ when you need him? All this blind testing talk when you are just repeating the same tests over and over without any different results. I guess many people here think they can hear A LOT better than they can. TRAINED or not. Ok, I am not going to rain on any more threads on doing (wasting) time on Blind tests. I say if you want to do it, fine with me! I am officially giving up. I am stunned that so many here believe a lot of scientific stuff EXCEPT for when it comes to listening. Listening is the weakest most unrepeatable and constantly changing variable there is and everyone wants to bring their God like hearing into the mix to make some kind of decision. It is not worth the time or the effort, but that's just me. I don't think trying to prove 50 years of tests wrong is a good way to spend ones time. I will now leave and I will be hanging out at the local watering hole, if anyone wants to talk about cool audio stuff like speaker wire risers! LOL

 

[Inner Space]

Make sure they are also channel to channel balanced (L/R) as that is a huge giveaway when the image shifts a tiny bit.

I have found this is very common, and is often the only way to "beat" a blind test. There's often a "ting" or a "ding" that occupies a slightly different point in 3D space. The test thereby becomes visual rather than auditory, with better retained memory and absolutely quantifiable impressions - not, "Does that "ding" have a subtly altered harmonic structure?" ... but "Is that "ding" physically lined up with point A in the room, or point B?"

 

[solderdude]

It looks like @GoldenOne is going to do his own testing without ASR involved and he is going to raise the money for the challenge charity himself.

This is a bit of a weird decision. The collected money will be going to the charity regardless of test results I presume. So regardless of outcome it is asking money for charity.. not a challenge.
The whole challenge and taking money from Amir was part of the appeal.

I hope @GoldenOne does something with the suggestions done here (record the signals going to the headphone real time) so independently it could be checked afterwards. I know this would probably mean high quality recordings that have no copyrights would have to be used.
Then, a certain period (week or so) after the test, the sequence of the test would be revealed.
Where no-one, aside from the helper administering the test, knows what the sequence was, not even GS and results had to be given by everyone before the actual sequence was made public.
Now that would be awesome.

I know it can still be rigged but am confident GS would play fair in such a 'live' event.

 

[tomita]

ASR instructions for @GoldenOne:

 

[Spkrdctr]

It looks like @GoldenOne is going to do his own testing without ASR involved and he is going to raise the money for the challenge charity himself.

This is a bit of a weird decision. The collected money will be going to the charity regardless of test results I presume. So regardless of outcome it is asking money for charity.. not a challenge.
The whole challenge and taking money from Amir was part of the appeal.

I hope @GoldenOne does something with the suggestions done here (record the signals going to the headphone real time) so independently it could be checked afterwards. I know this would probably mean high quality recordings that have no copyrights would have to be used.
Then, a certain period (week or so) after the test, the sequence of the test would be revealed.
Where no-one, aside from the helper administering the test, knows what the sequence was, not even GS and results had to be given by everyone before the actual sequence was made public.
Now that would be awesome.

I know it can still be rigged but am confident GS would play fair in such a 'live' event.[/QUOTEI


I like your tag line "People have a tendency to overestimate their hearing capabilities". That should be pinned to the top of the ASR website! Of course, I would make it more certain saying "People always overestimate their hearing abilities".

 

[GoldenOne]

I hope @GoldenOne does something with the suggestions done here (record the signals going to the headphone real time) so independently it could be checked afterwards

I will be doing the test with the recommendations that yourself and others made in this thread so far.

Nothing has changed in regards to me wanting to do the test properly and have it be reliable. But the goalposts and aims of the test have been shifted so far from what was initially discussed and quite frankly I don't even know what it is amir is actually wanting me to test at this point.

So I'm going to do the test anyway. The money to charity was my main goal, Amir isn't going to do that anymore, so I'll raise it elsewhere.
If anyone here has suggestions or input on how it should be done then please do feel free to dm me or contact me elsewhere and I'll do my best to accommodate sensible suggestions.

Also looking into getting a few others to participate on canjam weekend so that it isn't just me and we have several participants to get better info from.

 

[MrPeabody]

In page 12 of this thread, GoldenOne made it apparent that he thought he should only have to demonstrate that he can hear a difference between the Schiit amp and any other amp of his own choosing, i.e., not necessarily an amp that Amir deemed sonically transparent.

In page 13 of this thread, Amir made it apparent that as far as he was concerned it would not be sufficient for GoldenOne to demonstrate that he can hear a difference between the Schiit amp and another amp of Amir's choosing. Amir asserted that GoldenOne should need to prove that he can actually hear all of the various poorly-defined, subjective qualities he had ascribed to the Schiit amp.

Prior to Amir's post near the bottom of page 13, it was starting to look as though GoldenOne was warming up to the idea that he needed to allow Amir to choose the other amp, so long as the other amp was in no way a clone of the Schiit in design and construction. But then Amir got very upset over several statements that GoldenOne had made, which statements were inherently immune to corroboration by any means whatsoever, because the fuzzy concepts dealt with in the statements were concepts that did not have any quantitative foundation.

When Amir wrote that post near the bottom of page 13, this episode became as dead as a dead skunk in the middle of the road. There was no longer a pulse, and no longer any chance of resuscitation. It was fully apparent that the two principles were lightyears apart in their expectations, and that there was no realistic hope that there would ever be a meeting of the minds on what sort of experiment would be useful.

And yet, in spite of the certain demise of this episode by the end of page 13, we are now up to page 30!

From Wikipedia:

Forms of traditional football have been played throughout Europe and beyond since antiquity. ... archaic forms of football, typically classified as mob football, would be played between neighbouring towns and villages, involving an unlimited number of players on opposing teams, who would clash in a heaving mass of people struggling to drag an inflated pig's bladder ... By some accounts, in some such events any means could be used to move the ball towards the goal, as long as it did not lead to manslaughter or murder...

Numerous attempts were made to ban football games, particularly the most rowdy and disruptive forms. This was especially the case in England, and in other parts of Europe, during the Middle Ages and early modern period. Between 1324 and 1667, in England alone, football was banned by more than 30 royal and local laws. ... King Edward II was so troubled by the unruliness of football in London that, on April 13, 1314, he issued a proclamation banning it:

Forasmuch as there is great noise in the city caused by hustling over large balls from which many evils may arise which God forbid; we command and forbid, on behalf of the King, on pain of imprisonment, such game to be used in the city in the future.​

These antiquated games went into sharp decline in the 19th century when the Highway Act of 1835 was passed banning the playing of football on public highways...

A Harvard tradition known as "Bloody Monday" began in 1827, which consisted of a mass ballgame between the freshman and sophomore classes ... All of these games, and others, shared certain commonalities. They remained largely mob style games, with huge numbers of players attempting to advance the ball into a goal area, often by any means necessary. Rules were simple, violence and injury were common. ...The violence of these mob-style games led to widespread protests and a decision to abandon them. Yale banned the play of all forms of football in 1860... The 1894 Harvard–Yale game, known as the "Hampden Park Blood Bath", resulted in crippling injuries for four players; the contest was suspended until 1897. The annual Army–Navy game was suspended from 1894 to 1898 for similar reasons. One of the major problems was the popularity of mass-formations like the flying wedge, in which a large number of offensive players charged as a unit against a similarly arranged defense. The resultant collisions often led to serious injuries and sometimes even death. Georgia fullback Richard Von Albade Gammon notably died on the field from concussions received against Virginia in 1897.

 

[Iving]

 

[gvl]

I have found this is very common, and is often the only way to "beat" a blind test. There's often a "ting" or a "ding" that occupies a slightly different point in 3D space. The test thereby becomes visual rather than auditory, with better retained memory and absolutely quantifiable impressions - not, "Does that "ding" have a subtly altered harmonic structure?" ... but "Is that "ding" physically lined up with point A in the room, or point B?"

Perhaps a mono blind test with a single speaker is a better procedure then?

 

[solderdude]

Perhaps a mono blind test with a single speaker is a better procedure then?

This was about headphone amps. He made a claim the Magnius was clearly distinguishable from other transparent amps under actual load conditions.

The challenge was to provide proof which could be done if he can distinguish the amps by the mentioned properties.
Of course for that they have to sound different. So detecting an audible difference under equal circumstances with statistical relevance is paramount to start with.

As long as the test is not administered by an impartial someone that knows what the (hidden) tell tale signs are, we have to believe it is done properly.
Of course this is not possible to verify from a remote location. When I would want to rig the test (to get a desired outcome) that would be extremely easy even when one has controls in place like recording the actual headphone signal. It's all about trust. That's what lacking.

For now, when done properly it would be educational for GS. That's about it and that's what I feel is an important step.

 

[ROOSKIE]

This was about headphone amps. He made a claim the Magnius was clearly distinguishable from other transparent amps under actual load conditions.

The challenge was to provide proof which could be done if he can distinguish the amps by the mentioned properties.
Of course for that they have to sound different. So detecting an audible difference under equal circumstances with statistical relevance is paramount to start with.

As long as the test is not administered by an impartial someone that knows what the (hidden) tell tale signs are, we have to believe it is done properly.
Of course this is not possible to verify from a remote location. When I would want to rig the test (to get a desired outcome) that would be extremely easy even when one has controls in place like recording the actual headphone signal. It's all about trust. That's what lacking.

For now, when done properly it would be educational for GS. That's about it and that's what I feel is an important step.

So just test one channel. He can choose L or R. That solves any channel imbalance. He can also use only his best ear.

 

[solderdude]

I will be doing the test with the recommendations that yourself and others made in this thread so far.

Nothing has changed in regards to me wanting to do the test properly and have it be reliable.

So I'm going to do the test anyway.
If anyone here has suggestions or input on how it should be done then please do feel free to dm me or contact me elsewhere and I'll do my best to accommodate sensible suggestions.

Also looking into getting a few others to participate on canjam weekend so that it isn't just me and we have several participants to get better info from.

Aside from recording the headphone input signal to the headphone and eliminating level differences at 1kHz (easy to verify/set when capturing) and insuring L and R are not swapped I would recommend to have a helper that won't give hints (even subconscious) and would do this for yourself first.
Spread it over a few days and keep sessions fairly short. Do statistically enough tries (15 to 20) and only verify if you have been at it for a while after a few attempts to gauge whether you can correctly identify.
I would advise you to not do this in front of a camera directly that puts pressure on.
Do the first tests in relaxed circumstances with no time pressure.

 

[solderdude]

So just test one channel. He can choose L or R. That solves any channel imbalance. He can also use only his best ear.

If GS claims he can hear differences in stereo imaging than it is important to do the test in stereo.
When there are L-R imbalances this should be dealt with of course. Easy to measure, possible to solve.

 

[gvl]

This was about headphone amps.

Right