From the OP:
So what other things can we do or that some of you do that is useful? What is a more effective way to engage people who don’t understand things about what can and cannot be heard without chiming in over and over “hey, do an ABX test or it didn’t happen”?
Sure there is an X. There's also a Y. What you describe is a test with X and Y.
Those get randomly assigned either A or B at the start of each round.
ABX tools may also offer a Y. Y is simply the other option. In those tools, you can also choose only to listen to X and Y.
The point of these tools/protocols should not be to make you suffer or to force you into something (which is a common invalid excuse that golden ear audiophiles make), but to help you detect even the tiniest of differences in a way that eliminates the possibility of you tricking yourself.
Whether you make your choice because you hear a difference, have a preference or experience a tingling sensation in your pinky does not matter.
The point is that, statistically, if your choices align with random chance then we're inclined to say that you cannot hear a difference.
Level matched A/B or Y/X comparisons can be a useful tool for people at home to try to evaluate and compare components.
Level matching using a voltage is better than using SPL in room.
SBTs (Single Blind Tests) are a good method at home since these component tests often requires manual intervention.
Encouragement is to suggest and support rigor, discouragement is “hey, do an ABX test or it didn’t happen”.
Let's say a user buys a set of $2,000 speaker cables. Speaker cables can absolutely change the response of a speakers.
Especially, ones with dubious designs. A rigorous experiment is to setup a SBT using two-amp channels from a split source.
Another person could switch the speaker cables out of view (SBT) upon request, such the listener does not know which cables are attached.
Possible outcomes could be:
- The listener is unable to reliably determine the cables in use
- The listener reliably determined the cables and picks the cheaper cable
- The listener reliably determined the cables and picks the more expensive cable
This gets interesting if the product in question is still within the return window.

The user may decide that they don't really sound much different but loves how they look on their new cable lifters.
I encourage such experiments (with rigor) and reading impressions. It is clear what these are listening sessions. They are not proof that one thing is superior to another on an objective basis.
I think many of us have been on the upgrade train, searching for that last bit of (affordable) performance, so have a visceral response to impression posts that threaten our wallets (again)

, but this is not always productive nor helpful.
- Rich