• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Blind test: we have a volunteer!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
Frankly, this is a PR disaster.

Don't get me wrong @amirm, your objective reality is my objective reality. I am typically unable to hear the differences @GoldenOne hears/claims to hear. I also do understand the near impossibility to check a remote test for cheating. Not implying that @GoldenOne would cheat, just that even if he doesn't, a remote uncontrolled/weakly controlled test will not convince anyone anyway. However, that was clear from the start, and going all-in with a $1000 bet was probably unwise, if spectacular.
I didn't challenge him to any test. I said originally that he is a pure subjectivist with almost no value whatsoever to measurements. Yet person after person was anointing him as the new objectivist God due to him throwing some test clips at MQA. You know, "my enemy's enemy is my friend" kind of thing. For evidence, I post this video.

Another subjectivist shows up and says that what he said in that video was just fine. Indeed he asked me what is wrong with it. I explain what was wrong with it: that he couldn't repeat any of those experiences in a controlled test. And offered $1000 if he could to indicate how much confidence I have in that. He could have said there are pink elephants and it would be the same as the nonsense he is saying in that video.

Out of the blue he comes and says he takes that challenge. A wise person in his shoes would not. But he did. So I created this thread for us to discuss how we go about constructing such a test.

We have not concluded what we are going to do. He has concluded though that he is going to run with the test as he has imagined it. Fine, I have offered him a C for trying to the tune of $300. To earn the rest which I love to donate to a worthy cause, a proper test that validates his specific claims in that video needs to be constructed.

Here is the good news: as I mentioned in my "reset" post, we actually don't need him to do more. We can construct the test properly and have him and others to participate in it. If he chooses not to, that is fine. We will still get to the truth.
 

CMOT

Active Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Messages
147
Likes
112
Is there a FAQ somewhere about how to run a valid (and therefore believable) double blind test on two devices that serve the same function? If so, can someone link to it here. If not, I propose a thread where we hash out such a guide, then codify it into a document that people can refer to anytime they want to test claims of perceptible differences (or also the direction of the differences).
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
The challenge was not expressed as "everything". The text you used was "any of these observations". You are repeating this error. Please correct it now.
We can play that game. Here is the original post that started it:

"the dynamic range feels quite compressed...it doesn't come across in measurements"

"... this is a fatiguing amp to me..."

"there is slight graininess and lack of separation...."

"there is not a lot of texture [in bass]..."

"timbre is not great in this amp..."

"mid texture and detail is not good..."

And this is in the first 7 minutes of this video!

Which one would you like him to prove? And is he on a path to do so with his test?
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
So we have everything on record, here is his response:
I'm happy to take you up on this.

Let's say the Holo May vs topping e30 if that suits? Both measure >110dB sinad with no audible concerns raised on your review for the e30, will set the may to OS so that there's no inherent FR difference.

I'll volume match to 0.01dB etc.
Any other conditions or things you'd like me to put in place let me know and I'll accommodate them if possible. How many runs, any other checks, or detail the full procedure for the test if you'd like.

As you see he completely changed the challenged to be two DACs being compared. Tell me who has attempted from start to change the 'goalpost,' me or him?
 

Blaspheme

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Messages
461
Likes
493
We can play that game. Here is the original post that started it ... Which one would you like him to prove? And is he on a path to do so with his test?
C'mon Amir, "any" versus "every" isn't a game. It's the basic parameters of the challenge: "every" is a higher bar. As I said before, I don't care which one. And he can do more if he likes, it's not up to me.
 

BrEpBrEpBrEpBrEp

Active Member
Joined
May 3, 2021
Messages
201
Likes
241
C'mon Amir, "any" versus "every" isn't a game. It's the basic parameters of the challenge: "every" is a higher bar. As I said before, I don't care which one. And he can do more if he likes, it's not up to me.
Proving any of the differences in the video is still different from proving any difference at all, though.
 

Blaspheme

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Messages
461
Likes
493
Proving any of the differences in the video is still different from proving any difference at all, though.
Yes, I agree you can take this interpretation. And responding to Amir earlier I agreed that he (Amir) listed some particular observations. (I provided an example where difference was one GO's claims, but that wasn't included in Amir's post in the MQA thread, so may be excluded if you adhere to the wording of the challenge).

Initially I assumed difference was the only purely objective result from a blinded experiment of the type being discussed here. But Amir proposed a blinded experiment with subjective evaluation of categories (based on an example he referred to) which allows for testing the specified observations.

Observing one of those meets Amir's challenge, the requirement to demonstrate all of them is more onerous. GO is free to try them all of course.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
C'mon Amir, "any" versus "every" isn't a game. It's the basic parameters of the challenge: "every" is a higher bar. As I said before, I don't care which one. And he can do more if he likes, it's not up to me.
It was a figure of speech, which you are misconstruing. Here is a dictionary meaning of "any" if you google for it:

1623121718996.png



One "or some of a thing or number of things." If I wanted to say for him to prove one thing, I would have said one thing. This is not a word game. My challenge was very clear on the totality of his approach in that video. I was not writing a legal contract or even speaking to him at the time.

I suggest you move on to contribute to us getting something done here.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
Folks, I don't have time for this kind of back and forth arguing. If you have nothing to contribute to the original topic of this test, i.e. how to construct this test, then don't. Or else I will close the thread and figure out another way to create the test.
 

Blaspheme

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Messages
461
Likes
493
It was a figure of speech, which you are misconstruing. Here is a dictionary meaning of "any" if you google for it:

View attachment 134436


One "or some of a thing or number of things." If I wanted to say for him to prove one thing, I would have said one thing. This is not a word game. My challenge was very clear on the totality of his approach in that video. I was not writing a legal contract or even speaking to him at the time.

I suggest you move on to contribute to us getting something done here.
You know that "any" never means "every", right? Neither legally, or as a figure of speech.

My interpretation is consistent with the definition: GO needs to demonstrate he can observe one or a number of those observations. Yes, my expertise is legal, not electrical engineering. You will be effectively entering into a contract (informal or otherwise) before the test commences. Resolving any ambiguities is normal procedure.

Defining the parameters of the challenge is entirely logical, regardless of perspective. And required for the test to proceed in practical terms. You explicitly asked for contributions to this. And as you can see earlier, I contributed to the possible framing of the test wrt the question of demonstrating the subjective categories. No one had defined or delineated this prior. After you considered that and responded, we had a practical formulation of the test that appeared to answer OG's question.

Ergo, progress. Put that to him clearly, and see what he thinks.
 
Last edited:

oldsysop

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2019
Messages
364
Likes
594
Frankly, this is a PR disaster.

Don't get me wrong @amirm, your objective reality is my objective reality. I am typically unable to hear the differences @GoldenOne hears/claims to hear. I also do understand the near impossibility to check a remote test for cheating. Not implying that @GoldenOne would cheat, just that even if he doesn't, a remote uncontrolled/weakly controlled test will not convince anyone anyway. However, that was clear from the start, and going all-in with a $1000 bet was probably unwise, if spectacular.

Some of the back-tracking/conditions make sense and were actually graciously accepted by "our blogger". And that's when the PR tide starts to turn. Whenever he calmly and confidently accepts something, you add new requirements, change the nature and the scope of the test. The net PR result is very negative: while "our blogger" builds his "nice accomodating and confident guy" image, you now appear to wiggle frantically in damage control mode, mostly because you trapped yourself in proposing a flawed challenge in the first place... :(

:facepalm:
This is exactly what I meant.
Personally, I don't believe in anything that GO claims, but I less like how Amir handled this issue.
GO is better positioned and that feeds the BS of the subjectivists.
 

Spkrdctr

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
534
Likes
557
Folks, I don't have time for this kind of back and forth arguing. If you have nothing to contribute to the original topic of this test, i.e. how to construct this test, then don't. Or else I will close the thread and figure out another way to create the test.

I understand what you are doing in trying to get people to do more blind testing. The more people blind test, the more they will realize that most equipment is quite good and the specs that we worry about are really excellent specs in a real listening environment. It would kill of at least 90% of the snake oil market. The problem is I feel your pain! I have tried to get regular people to do blind tests even without extreme efforts at matching everything etc. but failed miserably, no one will put in the work required. Having been involved in tests where the difference in equipment/wires/interconnects etc was so large (freaking HUGE!!!) we all thought it would be easy to tell the difference and nope, no one can tell. The speakers and room will cover and swamp any differences in other equipment.

I say all that to say I agree with what your trying to do. It is VERY hard to get people to do anything substantial, even the objectivists will go out and buy stuff without understanding that the super expensive piece of gear they just bought, will do no better than a mid range piece. It is hard when even people who know better act as if they do not know better. It wore me out years ago and I had to give up. Now I try to stay on the happy side of life. I wish you the best of luck Amir and maybe you will be successful where I was not. Your younger and have the energy needed!
 

Spkrdctr

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
534
Likes
557
On a different note, many posters here need to stop "taking Amir to task". He has explained himself very well and what this thread was about. A bit of respect for the guy who has this site and does all this work. Everyone needs to lighten up. This is not a life and death issue.
 

Dani_G

New Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2021
Messages
3
Likes
3
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.
And how do we know who is qualified for that job? Is there any requirement for an education/diploma of some sort? Otherwise we will just have to believe that whoever ends up doing the administration actually knows what he is expected to know.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
10,095
Likes
22,070
Location
The Neverlands
And how do we know who is qualified for that job? Is there any requirement for an education/diploma of some sort? Otherwise we will just have to believe that whoever ends up doing the administration actually knows what he is expected to know.

That is for Amir to decide who he trusts has enough knowledge, is willing to do so and lives close by.

As said before. GO should blind test without a camera first. I would be very surprised if he can discriminate between Magnius and another similar spec'd amp. I don't think it will come to a public test that is properly performed. I secretly hope he can but experience tells me otherwise.
There are very few people that have done well performed blind tests between 'similar' amps.
Between 'special amps' ... sure... they can be told apart.
 

JSmith

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
1,268
Likes
2,210
Location
Algol Perseus
that feeds the BS of the subjectivists
That said, who really cares what BS they believe?
GO is better positioned
I don't see this, random blogger without any credentials or known experience... I believe Amir is better "positioned" and always has been in relation to Cameron at least. Flavour of the month... won't last IMO.



JSmith
 

Blaspheme

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Messages
461
Likes
493
This is peak level stalking and doxxing. Assuming it's the same user, and goldenone isn't a particularity unique name - there is a Reddit user with that handle that has posts going back 15 years, you've not only revealed his name but linking to that forum also reveals location information and a photo of him. And if it's not him, you've now linked someone else's info to him instead. Both of these are truly dangerous.

Do you do this for all your forum users or just this one?

Edit: I guess the privacy policy of this website is a waste of time then
I was stupid enough to put a factual DoB in also (it's "required"). Etc. Certainly regretting that now.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,272
Likes
134,283
Location
Seattle Area
Do you do this for all your forum users or just this one?
Only the ones whose posts should be under the definition of any "doxxing:"

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...-technical-analysis.10886/page-10#post-345968

1623142850174.png


So a bunch of false accusations about me and poor other companies. Fine. But then he digs in more, giving links to my company and insinuating illegal activity:

1623142824519.png


And this SOB even goes after my employees as if they have some made up title? How does he know who works for me and who doesn't? How deep this "doxxing" went?

So yes, when you hide in the bushes and throw rocks, I like to know who I am dealing with.

Despite all of this, I have kept him as a member. He recently post copyrighted information against our strict forum rules against such. Still a member.

Love to have seen your reaction if he had gone after you this way.

This is a man with no honor. No ethics. He is not entitled to any such defense. I suggest you stay out of the mud lest you get dragged into it as well.
 

Blaspheme

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2021
Messages
461
Likes
493
Only the ones whose posts should be under the definition of any "doxxing:"

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...-technical-analysis.10886/page-10#post-345968

View attachment 134479

So a bunch of false accusations about me and poor other companies. Fine. But then he digs in more, giving links to my company and insinuating illegal activity:

View attachment 134478

And this SOB even goes after my employees as if they have some made up title? How does he know who works for me and who doesn't? How deep this "doxxing" went?

So yes, when you hide in the bushes and throw rocks, I like to know who I am dealing with.

Despite all of this, I have kept him as a member. He recently post copyrighted information against our strict forum rules against such. Still a member.

Love to have seen your reaction if he had gone after you this way.

This is a man with no honor. No ethics. He is not entitled to any such defense. I suggest you stay out of the mud lest you get dragged into it as well.
Umm, you've chosen to disclose your identity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom