Let's share placebo effect anecdotes!

[DavidMcRoy]

Too many times than I care to admit over 50 years in audio, I've tried to change the signal path in some way to assess a change, then "hearing one"...only to discover later that I had not in fact changed a thing.

 

[GGroch]

One of the more interesting examples of cognitive bias, with a twist, comes from a 2018 Absolute Sound Article about a story told by Thorston Loesch.

There is an excellent ASR thread discussing the example here.

A brief synopsis:
"Thorsten put together a blind ABX test where he told participants it was a comparison of two power cables. But when he went behind the curtains, ostensibly to change the power cable, what he actually did was switch the speaker cables on one channel, so the system was playing out of phase. Thorsten had three different types of audiophiles take his test: subjectivists, objectivists (ADD, AKA ASR types who do not believe power cords impact sound), and those who were neither. The subjectivists and neutral listeners heard the effects of the system being thrown out of phase. The objectivists heard no differences".

The article's author Steven Stone cites this as proof that Blind tests are bunk and that objectivists have tin ears: "The fact that the objectivists in Thorsten’s test were the ones who were so set in their opinions that it blinded them to the aural facts in front of their ears is a delicious irony."

This story sounds apocryphal to me, but if true what it actually proves is that Thorsten and Stone do not know what Blind Testing is. Telling Objectivists that they would be comparing power cords induced in them strong negative cognitive bias. Bias so strong it masked audio differences that would normally be obvious. It proves the strength of cognitive bias and that everyone, even objectivists, have it.

 

[CtheArgie]

Well, not audio. But I have worked designing clinical trials to reduce the placebo effects. And also to understand and explain how placebo affected changes in patients! What aspect did placebo affect? Maybe my experience made me change so rapidly from audiophool to ASR follower.

 

[sigbergaudio]

A few years back during the development of our SBS.1 speakers, I at one point had an industry colleague and friend over to listen and experiment with tuning. While already happy with the sound, we did a number of smaller tweaks over the span of a couple of hours while listening along the way, and both agreed the adjustments made it even better.

Later that evening I realized we had uploaded our changes to a different preset than the one we were actually listening to. The sound and configuration had been exactly the same all along.

 

[kemmler3D]

A few years back during the development of our SBS.1 speakers, I at one point had an industry colleague and friend over to listen and experiment with tuning. While already happy with the sound, we did a number of smaller tweaks over the span of a couple of hours while listening along the way, and both agreed the adjustments made it even better.

Later that evening I realized we had uploaded our changes to a different preset than the one we were actually listening to. The sound and configuration had been exactly the same all along.

I honestly think if you work in the biz, this kind of thing happens to everyone eventually.

One of the more interesting examples of cognitive bias, with a twist, comes from a 2018 Absolute Sound Article about a story told by Thorston Loesch.

There is an excellent ASR thread discussing the example here.

A brief synopsis:
"Thorsten put together a blind ABX test where he told participants it was a comparison of two power cables. But when he went behind the curtains, ostensibly to change the power cable, what he actually did was switch the speaker cables on one channel, so the system was playing out of phase. Thorsten had three different types of audiophiles take his test: subjectivists, objectivists (ADD, AKA ASR types who do not believe power cords impact sound), and those who were neither. The subjectivists and neutral listeners heard the effects of the system being thrown out of phase. The objectivists heard no differences".

The article's author Steven Stone cites this as proof that Blind tests are bunk and that objectivists have tin ears: "The fact that the objectivists in Thorsten’s test were the ones who were so set in their opinions that it blinded them to the aural facts in front of their ears is a delicious irony."

This story sounds apocryphal to me, but if true what it actually proves is that Thorsten and Stone do not know what Blind Testing is. Telling Objectivists that they would be comparing power cords induced in them strong negative cognitive bias. Bias so strong it masked audio differences that would normally be obvious. It proves the strength of cognitive bias and that everyone, even objectivists, have it.

It's an interesting one, it really does demonstrate that beliefs affect what we hear. What I want to know is what the subjectivists said about the changes while they were happening. Did anyone actually say "Hey, I think one of the channel has the polarity reversed"? Or did they talk about how much better it sounded?

 

[sergeauckland]

One of the more interesting examples of cognitive bias, with a twist, comes from a 2018 Absolute Sound Article about a story told by Thorston Loesch.

There is an excellent ASR thread discussing the example here.

A brief synopsis:
"Thorsten put together a blind ABX test where he told participants it was a comparison of two power cables. But when he went behind the curtains, ostensibly to change the power cable, what he actually did was switch the speaker cables on one channel, so the system was playing out of phase. Thorsten had three different types of audiophiles take his test: subjectivists, objectivists (ADD, AKA ASR types who do not believe power cords impact sound), and those who were neither. The subjectivists and neutral listeners heard the effects of the system being thrown out of phase. The objectivists heard no differences".

The article's author Steven Stone cites this as proof that Blind tests are bunk and that objectivists have tin ears: "The fact that the objectivists in Thorsten’s test were the ones who were so set in their opinions that it blinded them to the aural facts in front of their ears is a delicious irony."

This story sounds apocryphal to me, but if true what it actually proves is that Thorsten and Stone do not know what Blind Testing is. Telling Objectivists that they would be comparing power cords induced in them strong negative cognitive bias. Bias so strong it masked audio differences that would normally be obvious. It proves the strength of cognitive bias and that everyone, even objectivists, have it.

This definitely applies to me. I have a strong bias against hearing differences (as in most cases there aren't any) that I ignore real differences even when those should be clearly audible.

S

 

[wwenze]

I met a guy whose DAC sounded different depending on where he placed the spike feet

 

[TonyJZX]

i'm convinced that XLR is amazing and if you have XLR all down the chain you're getting ALL the music

you know... inky blackness, soundstage, imaging, dynamics, the whole lot, even Amir says XLR is 'preferred'

Of course I know I would always fail a DBX... but hey, let us all bang that balanced drum.

i would also go as far as to say I turn my nose up at my single ended gear. But I know its all bungkus.

 

[Basic Channel]

The power of the brain to alter sounds is amazing. For example, in two tracks that come to mind (1) What mama said by Jeff Beck (2) I'm afraid of Americans by David Bowie - there is sub bass happening that only my sub can make, but with the sub off I can "hear" my brain putting those sounds back. You can't unhear a sound once you know it's there. I'm not saying the sub is redundant but the brain is doing its best to remind me what's there. Once I read an audiophile explain that only after spending a considerable sum he could hear Nick Cave light a cigarette a few seconds into Red Right Hand. I can hear that on my phone!

You are probably hearing the overtones of the bass when the sub is off. Similar reasons men sound the same on the phone, or those tiny speakers that apparently have decent bass.

Missing fundamental - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[solderdude]

I have too many stories about placebo and testing people without them knowing I secretly tested them performed over many years as well as (accidentally) fooling myself quite a few times.

 

[TonyJZX]

i think this is also pervasive in the industrial world

i have worked on complex networks from miltiary to govt. to transport etc. inc. air

and also factory lines processing food and beverages

the place is FULL of 'old wives tales' we do *this* because it has alleged *that* effect

 

[GGroch]

i'm convinced that XLR is amazing and if you have XLR all down the chain you're getting ALL the music

Right Tony, I'm the same. In the 2020s this is the feature that DAC/Amp manufacturers add that's the easiest sell to us spec watchers. We believe cables make no difference up until you say "Balanced".

Monoblocks and PFFB are 2 others, I have a pair of Z3 Monos on the way to replace my perfectly good older single ended TPA3255 amp. I am certain this combo will release more endorphins while almost surely making no actual audible difference.

I have too many stories about placebo and testing people without them knowing I secretly tested them performed over many years as well as (accidentally) fooling myself quite a few times.

You really do.
I really appreciated this one on cable swaps that is the good vibrations version of my power cord story. It raises the question "If endorphins are released and the rent is paid, what the heck is bad about placebos."

 

[Basic Channel]

I honestly think if you work in the biz, this kind of thing happens to everyone eventually.

Happens to all working in music as far as I'm aware.

I've mentioned it in other threads but playing with Ableton for years has left me with too many examples. It's always amusing how extreme you go before common sense kicks in and you realise the thing is off/etc.

I like adding stuff I can't hear that I think makes repetition less boring over time. So random tiny frequency or volume differences on each hit or via LFO. I had one setup so I couldn't hear it with LFO set to random waveform and a friend modulated the rate of modulation and claimed it was "better". On terrible speakers as well.

So I suppose fallibility doesn't dawn on every Ableton user.

 

[Ktacos]

I've run active 2 and 3 ways with drivers out of phase several times, all the while getting engrossed in what I thought was amazing sound lol.

I used to work in live sound but left because I couldn't separate work from fun. Was checking monitors on stage for FoH friend. Just gave him the usual feedback of what stuff to cut.

"Hey that' good, sounds better"

"I didn't do anything yet"

welp.

 

[Multicore]

I think it's humbling to realize your ears are fallible, but are you really ashamed of simply being human?

I don't see it as a failure or something to be ashamed of. It's an example of how sensing is rather complex, sophisticated and deriving/revising information from sensory inputs is, I suppose, heuristic. The response to sensory input generally involves integrating new inputs with concurrent inputs from other senses together with existing models. I think it's interesting and impressive how that works. That a part of me failed to interpret sensory inputs correctly and should recognize the failure and be ashamed suggests a Cartesian Theater.

 

[Room314]

I've also personally spent more time than I care to admit being disappointed in how small a change a given filter or EQ knob was making, before realizing it wasn't active at all.

Just yesterday spent considerable time tweaking the frequency response of my in-ears in APO Peace. The veil was finally lifted!

Of course, it turned out the correct output was not set.

 

[Multicore]

Not a product placebo story but I'm always surprised how different my set sounds when I have time to really relax and dim the lights. Especially late when it's quiet. Perhaps some vine but not even needed.
Everything's good, soundstage is stable, not a hint of tweeter distortion, punchy but smooth delivery, tuned a bit "warm" on purpose, it's just as it should be. I have a pretty nice mid-fi set, measured and Dirac corrected (and adjusted to taste) so objectively I know it always sounds pretty good. But some days it does not sound good and I feel I should tweak something. With time I've learned when I really shouldn't.

We are all subjectivists. I find it comforting my senses don't work like scientific instruments.

 

[Ktacos]

Realizing the fallibility of our hearing is like the ultimate ego check in audio. You either accept it and laugh at yourself, or you get mad and think it couldn't possibly be you and you go sub to GR Research.

 

[pinger]

"High end audio" that purports to show audible differences in components and accessories other than speakers is a religion. Its based on faith not facts.

 

[beagleman]

Too many times than I care to admit over 50 years in audio, I've tried to change the signal path in some way to assess a change, then "hearing one"...only to discover later that I had not in fact changed a thing.

"Hearing something" does not always equate to the sound being changed an equal amount in reality.