The deaf leading the blind? A piece by Henning Møller (B&K)

[pkane]

It doesn't have to.


I don't do AB. Hate it. Don't even know how I got to Silver in the Philips Golden Ear Challenge... Must have been mad. Awful tune.

AB is for spot-the-difference (quick) comparison, not for observational assessment (where one listen for problems over a long period, those one is acquanted with). Different goals.


By the way, I shortlist equipment from measured performance, buy used then live with for a while and keep or pass along depending on shortcomings, so I'm not really worried about bias. Budget restraints help me to be more selective and cautious. I don't waste money on cables.

It’s perfectly fine for you do your personal evaluation whichever way works for you. It’s a completely different story if you use the results of such evaluations as a review to share with others. In the interest of not fooling anyone else, such reviews should be done blind.

 

[tuga]

But all the evidence suggests that long-term "observational assessment" as you call it is less sensitive to differences than ABX comparison (which needn't be short-term by the way; it's the switching, not the listening, that needs to be short if the listener is to have the best chance of hearing differences).

I am not listening for differences though; I am hunting for shortcomings.

AB is fine for tonal balance.
But try to listen to a new pair speakers for a week then put your old pair back. Don't you think that habituation will also highlight differences?

 

[tuga]

It’s perfectly fine for you do your personal evaluation whichever way works for you. It’s a completely different story if you use the results of such evaluations as a review to share with others. In the interest of not fooling anyone, such reviews should be done blind.

I don't share my "reviews" with others, not even myself.
I may share in-room FR measurements but that's all.

Fools will be fooled no matter what...

 

[andreasmaaan]

I am not listening for differences though; I am hunting for shortcomings.

If you can't hear a difference, then you can't hear a shortcoming.

But try to listen to a new pair speakers for a week then put your old pair back. Don't you think that habituation will also highlight differences?

Probably, but not as well as if you'd been able to switch between them quickly enough to keep the just-switched-from sound in echoic memory.

 

[pkane]

I don't share my "reviews" with others, not even myself.
I may share in-room FR measurements but that's all.

Fools will be fooled no matter what...

That’s perfectly fine then: enjoy what sounds better to you and don’t worry about measurements and blind tests.

 

[tuga]

That’s perfectly fine then: enjoy what sounds better to you and don’t worry about measurements and blind tests.

I don't worry about blind tests. I don't worry about deaf tests either.

I absolutely love measurements though, they're terribly informative and useful. I am a practicing objectivist.

 

[dshreter]

On the other hand, Toole proved that the correlation between FR flatness and directivity/power response smoothness is high enough that everything else can be ignored unless it's botched. Some holes remain like a way to perceptually measure distorsion (i.e. not THD+IMD) and the absolute audibility of group delay and spectral decay.

There are big holes that still exist. Toole showed flatness and smoothness are important. But wide vs narrow directivity is uncertain as well as in room response. Probably the biggest unknown is the approach to reflection and whether or not channel cross talk is desirable. For now, preference with regard to these real variables is being driven by ear.

 

[pkane]

I don't worry about blind tests. I don't worry about deaf tests either.

I absolutely love measurements though, they're terribly informative and useful. I am a practicing objectivist.

Well, then that’s where there is a problem. Objectively, sighted testing is ... subjective. As I explained before, the brain and your memories and experience make it so.

You can’t separate your physical and mental state from what you are hearing — you can only try to prove to yourself and others that it isn’t a factor. You do this by blind testing.

 

[Jinjuku]

You probably never heard of AMG, Alpina, Ruf,...Prodrive. They pick a road car and modify it, improving performance.

And I've also seen them, without fail, quantify those modifications.

 

[Purité Audio]

The specs of a component can be incrementally ‘improved’ but the question is one of audability.
Keith

 

[pkane]

And I've also seen them, without fail, quantify those modifications.

I’ve had cars modified by some of these, and made some modifications myself (ECU, filters, exhaust, etc). I can tell you that subjectively, the car performance improved, but I didn’t dare to blind test it

 

[tuga]

Well, then that’s where there is a problem. Objectively, sighted testing is ... subjective. As I explained before, the brain and your memories and experience make it so.

You can’t separate your physical and mental state from what you are hearing — you can only try to prove to yourself and others that it isn’t a factor. You do this by blind testing.

What do you mean by "testing"?
I am definitely not tasting (though I would much rather follow my preference than accept that Toole's unsighted preference results are what I should prefer because 250 assorted blind listeners appear to agree on what they prefer which is actually what I prefer too).
And I am observing. With my ears. Earserving. Not comparing. Like Darwin on his voyage.

AB-ing isn't the only way to detect differences. If you are very used to something then differences become apparent. But you need a constant system, it doesn't work if you go to your friend's home and compare a couple of DACs because all your references are gone.

It happens also I put too much sugar in my team or if Onken is using bitter mangoes in this latest batch of yogurt or if I sit at a different place when at the monday lunchtime recital in the local church.

 

[tuga]

I’ve had cars modified by some of these, and made some modifications myself (ECU, filters, exhaust, etc). I can tell you that subjectively, the car performance improved, but I didn’t dare to blind test it

Cheeky. Did you try replacing the battery cables too.

Feast yourself...

 

[Leporello]

Radical "Objectivist" deniers also said the same about TIM...

Do try to be more precise in your assertions. Who, where, when? What was actually being said? Again, this sounds very much like a strawman argument. Surely you can do better.

 

[tuga]

Do try to be more precise in your assertions. Who, where, when? What was actually being said? Again, this sounds very much like a strawman argument. Surely you can do better.

I can put you in my ignore list.

 

[pkane]

What do you mean by "testing"?
I am definitely not tasting (though I would much rather follow my preference than accept that Toole's unsighted preference results are what I should prefer because 250 assorted blind listeners appear to agree on what they prefer which is actually what I prefer too).
And I am observing. With my ears. Earserving. Not comparing. Like Darwin on his voyage.

AB-ing isn't the only way to detect differences. If you are very used to something then differences become apparent. But you need a constant system, it doesn't work if you go to your friend's home and compare a couple of DACs because all your references are gone.

It happens also I put too much sugar in my team or if Onken is using bitter mangoes in this latest batch of yogurt or if I sit at a different place when at the monday lunchtime recital in the local church.

Blind testing = testing, analysis, comparison, compare and contrast, determine differences WITHOUT knowing the identity of the device under test. Do it with short A/B or two weeks at a time, that’s not relevant. Not knowing the DUT is the key to eliminate subjective biases.

 

[pkane]

Cheeky. Did you try replacing the battery cables too.

Feast yourself...

Hmm. No, but it bet you that would make a huge difference

 

[Leporello]

I can put you in my ignore list.

Woah, that really hurts.

 

[andreasmaaan]

AB-ing isn't the only way to detect differences. If you are very used to something then differences become apparent. But you need a constant system, it doesn't work if you go to your friend's home and compare a couple of DACs because all your references are gone.

I'm not saying having references and experience can't help, I'm just saying that it's not possible to extract what you hear from what you know, what you feel, and what you imperfectly recollect.

Isn't this just a basic, well-established fact of psychology?

To argue this by analogy: If you were offered a drug for some given medical condition, and that drug had been tested and found to have no positive effect under rigorous test conditions, but to have had a beneficial effect under sighted conditions only, would you accept this drug simply because the participants in the sighted trials had used the drug and others like it for a long time and believed they had developed an ability to discern its (purported) effects?

 

[Putter]

So, where are these 'radical objectivists'? To me, they sound like strawmen.

As does ears-only alt-"Subjectivists" . These terms call to mind the political situation on this side of the pond where name calling seems to overwhelm our shared values.

P.S. You already denied that they are ear-only.