...
People often imagine or arbitrarily declare preferences where they have none.
Which happens to be exactly what I said. :-D
...
People often imagine or arbitrarily declare preferences where they have none.
Yes it has been a thread, but finding it will be a lifetime of work!This dialog makes the top statement a negative value.
I've never been a fan of tests, especially those that are ABX/T/? and/or blind.
I also do not follow the results of such testing; even if under controlled environment w/golden-ears, who can keep their 'biases' in check!
Not that it will force me to replace any of my current A/V hardware... but I must ask:
Can you remember (and/or willing to share) the CliffsNotes version of that consensus?Yes it has been a thread, but finding it will be a lifetime of work!
Sure, it is the level of my computer skills which are well known to the ASR faithful. I am amazing in the area of turning them on or off. After that I need help. So, it doesn't apply to any "normal" technically savvy person. Well, I might be exaggerating my skills a wee bit.....LOL OMG, I was being taught online some basic (very basic) Discord stuff and I think others were amazed I didn't know how to zip around all of the social media sites. They think I'm a dinosaur. Extinction imminent!Can you remember (and/or willing to share) the CliffsNotes version of that consensus?
Or provide me with your opinion, for which I promise not to insult you about!![]()
Sure, I agree and I was going to say those exact facts about you but you forgot to answer my Q:Sure, it is the level of my ... skills which are well known to the ASR faithful. I am amazing ...
... but I must ask:
...Or provide me with your opinion, for which I promise not to insult you about!Has there ever been an ASR poll attempting to get a definitive consensus about member reliance on such testing (blind/AB...)?
Good Gosh Man! Only 60 posts in and you have cracked the code. The longer term members are satisfied in the knowledge that they are right no matter what. But, when it is the truth, what else can you say?How dare you all! Whatever is discussed here, I am right and you are wrong
Post 62 was my answer. I think you forgot I posted that. My legendary computer skills blinded you to the answer. There has been a thread on it here but you would have to find it. That can be easy or a heavy lift. Depends on your savvy skills. I just pawn off that kind of work to an underling. What else do they have to do but satisfy my whims? Just keep this between us. Don't want my secrets to get out.Sure, I agree and I was going to say those exact facts about you but you forgot to answer my Q:
![]()
Lawyer-client privileged factoids. << The land-shark (=you)Just keep this between us... That can be easy or a heavy lift.
At first glance I thought you were saying you take them to be serious descriptions of what lies in the sound waves. But now I see you mean the writers believe what they are writing.I take subjectivist reports seriously, as in I don't believe they are lying to me.
It is so rare that they are doing anything other than sighted impressions, that the only reasonable approach is to treat them as going sighted. A properly controlled listening test would certainly be mentioned in the report, given the effort involved.I am hesitant to spend time or money if I find out they are giving only sighted impressions.
Exactly.…The kinds of improvements that interest me are those that aren't so subtle, the kind that a properly performed blind or double blind test will easily show are audible and preferred by most people on a wide variety of recordings.
How the heck did we get onto the topic of micro-tremors detection, while someone is telling lies?descriptions of what lies in the sound waves.
Yes, I should have put it the other way - If I know that blind testing was used I'm more likely to consider expending time and money to try the product, assuming it actually passed the blind tests, and a substantial number of people show a strong preference.It is so rare that they are doing anything other than sighted impressions, that the only reasonable approach is to treat them as going sighted. A properly controlled listening test would certainly be mentioned in the report, given the effort involved.
Yes, agreed….but who is actually doing this? Properly controlled blind panel testing of commercial speakers in groups of 3 or more for the purpose of publishing a speaker comparison test? I don’t know of anyone doing that.Yes, I should have put it the other way - If I know that blind testing was used I'm more likely to consider expending time and money to try the product, assuming it actually passed the blind tests, and a substantial number of people show a strong preference.
The proxy method is great and generally applies to my tastes. My experience in listening to speakers with a high preference rating is that I never hate them. For some reason I don't always love them. Comparing the Revel M16 to the Sony SSCS5 I would call the Revel better. I'll bet I'd choose it as better in a blind test. Maybe not. But in use in my home I find the Sony more pleasant even though it sounds a little rougher to me. It's something about it's overall presentation that I find more agreeable. In blind taste tests people prefer fruit juice that has some extra sweetener added. I agree that it's got a bit more pleasant punch on a quick comparison. Over time I end up going for the unsweetened apple sauce and juice. So, it's good to know these preferences are verified repeatedly but you still have to take the stuff home and try it for a while.Yes, agreed….but who is actually doing this? Properly controlled blind panel testing of commercial speakers in groups of 3 or more for the purpose of publishing a speaker comparison test? I don’t know of anyone doing that.
It’s just too rare to be useful. Plus, it only gives one a preference ranking for the speakers under test. It’s not a very fruitful way for us to go about gear shortlisting in practice, because of the lack of data.
That’s why Dr Floyd Toole and his associates dedicated half a career to finding a proxy method, whereby we can examine a set of objective measurements of a speaker and conclude, with very high confidence, that it would be preferred in a proper blind listening comparison to a speaker that measures less well. Looking at those measurements, the so-called Spinorama, is a window into a blind listening test in absentia. That’s why it’s an incredibly important piece of audio science.
And that’s why ASR is an doing incredibly important service for the audio community, by publishing Spinorama-style measurements of many speakers. They are proxy blind panel preference tests.
cheers
I doubt it.
How do you know?I doubt it.
No knowledge, just doubt.How do you know?