As many of you suspect, what is usually happening during sighted evaluations of equipment (e.g. comparing DAC’s, cables, amplifiers, the the phenomenon of “burn in” and “break in” etc etc) is related to changes occurring in the brain (neural connections and neurochemistry), rather than within and in between equipment. I use the word “usually” carefully because occasionally some examples of equipment being evaluated have defects that are acute enough to gain audibility. In other words there are rare exceptions (eg a particularly poorly implemented Triode tube amp).
Of course, biases and changes in neural pathways and chemistry have been tested in pier reviewed publications.
Here is just one example (there are many!):
(All credit goes to the authors listed in the publication)
A copy of the abstract from the above referenced paper:
“Audio burn-in, often referred to as the process by which audio equipment undergoes a series of played
sounds to achieve optimal performance, remains a topic of significant debate within both audiophile
communities and relevant scientific fields. While some attribute perceived changes in sound quality to
actual physical changes in the equipment, an emerging perspective points to the interplay of physiological,
psychological, and social factors that might influence these perceptions. This narrative review delves into
the intricate layers of auditory physiology, cognitive sound interpretation, and the wider societal beliefs
around burn-in. We underscore the importance of discerning between actual physical changes in audio gear
and the multifaceted human factors that potentially modulate our perception of sound. Through a
comprehensive exploration, this article illuminates the complexities of this phenomenon, offering insights
for both medical professionals and passionate audio enthusiasts and proposing directions for future
research.”
-Lumi
ignoring the subjective nonsense can be the result of trying it for decades and then by hard won experience finally realising it’s was all bunk .
)
