• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Why haven't subjectivists and objectivists met to do a live ABX test?

OP
R

rsoffer

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2022
Messages
69
Likes
76
IMG_4583.jpg


I did my first rapid volume matched A/B test today with a switcher.

THX AAA One vs. Singxer SA-1. Op amp based AB amp vs. Discrete Class A. $150 vs. $600.
Even sighted, they sound absolutely identical. It's pretty insane hahaha.

The good news is, the 6XX are amazing and I'm just enjoying listening to music.
 

Palladium

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 4, 2017
Messages
630
Likes
769
And the joy of debating with “objectivists” is they pay attention to data and facts and are open to having their conjectures refuted by a good, well reasoned argument backed with evidence; on the other hand; “subjectivists” are trapped in a narrative universe with verisimilitude as the criteria for reality.

How weird subjectivists keep spending tons of effort discrediting ABX instead of just doing it....Hmmm
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City

Koeitje

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
2,292
Likes
3,880
I did a blind listening test with an uncle who had a pretty high-end setup (KEF Reference 207 with McIntosh amps). We wanted to test some cable as well as netfilters and such. Didn't do any statistics on the result, because it was obvious that neither of us could hear a difference. My uncle didn't really have an issue with accepting that, but I can understand others might have. I think he actually was happy, because he sold all his expensive cables and bought just well constructed cheaper cables instead and used to rest on some nice acoustic panels. Probably sounded better afterwards. I think the mentality of a lot of people have with regards to this is just odd. Isn't it a good thing that your four or five figures worth of cables don't do anything? Because that means you can spend that much money on things that actually improve your system.
 

Digby

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
1,632
Likes
1,556
No, please no. You are explaining my "God hearing" that I trot out periodically on ASR. We have NOT got the hearing of God. Human hearing is low to mid level in the hearing of all animals. We just are not that awesome in our hearing. If in doubt ask your cat or dog. Both will say our human hearing is lousy.
Right, but within that low to mid level will be some variance. Obviously, tests would be needed to verify someone claiming to be at the upper end of this range, rather than just the say so of self appointed 'golden ears'.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
Right, but within that low to mid level will be some variance. Obviously, tests would be needed to verify someone claiming to be at the upper end of this range, rather than just the say so of self appointed 'golden ears'.
Well, but those measurements can't describe my refined ability to hear "musicality" and "black backgrounds" under my 40db noise floor.
;)
 
Last edited:

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
Actually, now that I think of it, there's a reason that old dudes would object to audio measurements. They bring nothing but bad news to us.
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
@ahofer I (hope) I know when you are being sarcastic, but it is a lot easier if you signal use of sarcasm, eg with an emoji ;) —especially when on an international forum, not everyone has English first language, and people might think you actually believe your words as written. Thanks
 

Head_Unit

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 27, 2018
Messages
1,341
Likes
688
I've heard something over longer time spans
there's also the argument of listening in a relaxed state, so alpha brain waves take over.
My take on the A/B/X test is "hey no need to hurry." I've posted elsewhere, hide you amp or cables or whatever. Listen, listen, listen. Each time you listen make some notes about how the system sounds. At some random time when you are out, someone comes and swaps something. Do you notice? No "evil" A/B/X box screwing up the synergy, no hurried comparison, no unfamiliar environment.

One should realize it is often impossible to change the minds of those that already made up their mind.
Ha ha that is also true of the objectivists, which someone noted have seldom done A/B/X tests themselves. I'll plead guilty as charged to that-I haven't heard cables to make any significant difference, but I've only changed oh a half dozen? times, and never for anything crazy crazy expensive. And not in wildly expensive systems.
 

Head_Unit

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 27, 2018
Messages
1,341
Likes
688
...I feel the simplest most fair test would be to know in advance which amp you are identifying, and keep that constant the entire test. For example, amp A is the THX amp. Amp B is the Asgard. Identify which is the THX amp every time on random switching of the cables.
That is exactly NOT what a truly scientific test is, because knowing what one amp is introduces psychological factors as a possible variable. A second variable is the actual different units. Only ONE variable can be changed if you want to be sure that variable made the difference. This is where subjectivists go nuts because many people get wildly angry at the mere breath of a suggestion that it might be possible psychological factors are making them "hear" difference without any physical acoustic reality.

Now, whether those psychological expectations actually change the listening experience in the brain is a good question, and a nice thesis waiting to be tested by someone with access to an MRI machine!
 

LTig

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
5,760
Likes
9,442
Location
Europe
Now, whether those psychological expectations actually change the listening experience in the brain is a good question, and a nice thesis waiting to be tested by someone with access to an MRI machine!
With your head inside the big MRI magnet and its gradient coils it is impossible to do serious listening tests. Even using a headphone with very good isolation the noise level is far too high.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
No I didn't jump to conclusions. The facepalm was because of the implication objectivists would fake not hearing differences and that such an approach would give them satisfaction. Many were once subjective in our audio evaluations and learned over time. I doubt many if any would fake not hearing a difference. Plus even if someone did, a good test would let others who heard the difference demonstrate they hear it beyond chance results. So even if someone were so motivated it would be a poor approach to win an argument.
For any thinking about this idea, look at the Stereophile amplifier blind test. Find the debate about the statistical conclusions in the footnotes (for instance in the "biased listeners" letter here). Realize that the whole problem is that the audience was prone to hearing differences and that drove the interpretation errors at Stereophile. Realize the default bias is to hear a difference where there is none.

Of course, ABX is very helpful with this, too bad they couldn't bring themselves to do it. Also the "lucky coin/golden ears" argument is ultimately where all this good work goes to die.
 

Spkrdctr

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
2,212
Likes
2,934
For any thinking about this idea, look at the Stereophile amplifier blind test. Find the debate about the statistical conclusions in the footnotes (for instance in the "biased listeners" letter here). Realize that the whole problem is that the audience was prone to hearing differences and that drove the interpretation errors at Stereophile. Realize the default bias is to hear a difference where there is none.

Of course, ABX is very helpful with this, too bad they couldn't bring themselves to do it. Also the "lucky coin/golden ears" argument is ultimately where all this good work goes to die.
The problem is that it never even gets to a serious decision between items under test. When before the test the testee (moron?) says, the difference is night and day, I could tell any time anywhere. In fact it is so easy my 8 year old can tell a difference. You have to be deaf not to hear it. Then after the blind test is failed miserably, the excuses start.
A "few" people have stated publicly (Amir and myself and others) in this great site that they were tuning in a stereo or subwoofer or both and after hours of tinkering and getting it just right, you find out the sub was not connected or some other issue that shows you tuned nothing. You ears and brain, well technically just your brain was fooling you the entire time. The best thing to do is to walk away having learned just how fallible our hearing is. It is when the person gets quiet, acts like nothing happened and a day later denies that it ever happened. and still believes they can hear a flea fart on a close miked cat recording. So, when people are going to lie like that, you really have nothing else to say except to stop engaging with that liar, I mean person, on that subject. Return to the old "which car is faster discussions" where his mind is free to wander without insulting your intelligence and ethics.

Just sayin :)
 
Last edited:

fpitas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 7, 2022
Messages
9,885
Likes
14,191
Location
Northern Virginia, USA
I did a blind listening test with an uncle who had a pretty high-end setup (KEF Reference 207 with McIntosh amps). We wanted to test some cable as well as netfilters and such. Didn't do any statistics on the result, because it was obvious that neither of us could hear a difference. My uncle didn't really have an issue with accepting that, but I can understand others might have. I think he actually was happy, because he sold all his expensive cables and bought just well constructed cheaper cables instead and used to rest on some nice acoustic panels. Probably sounded better afterwards. I think the mentality of a lot of people have with regards to this is just odd. Isn't it a good thing that your four or five figures worth of cables don't do anything? Because that means you can spend that much money on things that actually improve your system.
There's a theory that simply disconnecting and reconnecting oxidized cable connectors might account for improvements, or at least differences. Of course, that speaks to the connectors used, not the cables.
 

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,084
Likes
4,962
Location
Germany
Wouldn't it be even easier to tell with a super high end amp vs. a budget well measuring amp?
If they both measure better than the "threshold of incompetence", you can't tell them apart in blind ABX.

I hear that bugs the subjectivists somewhat. ;)
 

Spkrdctr

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
2,212
Likes
2,934
If they both measure better than the "threshold of incompetence", you can't tell them apart in blind ABX.

I hear that bugs the subjectivists somewhat. ;)
But, you can't compare a $30,000 amp to a $300 amp. The cost just screams that it has better engineering, better sound and the internals are all of a higher quality. Plus, even the professional magazine like the Absolute Sound will tell you, the more money you spend the better the sound. It can't be all wrong. No one in the Audio profession would lie would they? Come on man, don't tell me they were lying all these years. OK, I don't believe you anyways.

I have pretty much said it all. LOL:facepalm:
 

Newman

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
3,448
Likes
4,211
The problem is that it never even gets to a serious decision between items under test. When before the test the testee (moron?) says, the difference is night and day, I could tell any time anywhere. In fact it is so easy my 8 year old can tell a difference. You have to be deaf not to hear it. Then after the blind test is failed miserably, the excuses start.
A "few" people have stated publicly (Amir and myself and others) in this great site that they were tuning in a stereo or subwoofer or both and after hours of tinkering and getting it just right, you find out the sub was not connected or some other issue that shows you tuned nothing. You ears and brain, well technically just your brain was fooling you the entire time. The best thing to do is to walk away having learned just how fallible our hearing is. It is when the person gets quiet, acts like nothing happened and a day later denies that it ever happened. and still believes they can hear a flea fart on a close miked cat recording. So, when people are going to lie like that, you really have nothing else to say except to stop engaging with that liar, I mean person, on that subject. Return to the old "which car is faster discussions" where his mind is free to wander without insulting your intelligence and ethics.

Just sayin :)
What you say about the extreme power of the sighted listening effect is true, and is the reason I am prone to reminding people here to stop pontificating here on ‘what sounds like what, and is in the sound waves’ when their impressions are coming from sighted listening.

This even applies to different masters of a recording. When you know which one is the brick wall waveform, no prizes for guessing what sighted listening is going to cause you to ‘hear’. ;)

The strength of the sighted listening effect is still underestimated by some on this site who claim to have a pro-objective attitude, but insist there is a time and a place where sighted listening will reveal inner truths about the sound waves. People involved in music production seem especially prone to this mistake…perhaps because their professional workflow entirely omits blind testing (too slow and time-consuming), so their self-regard, and their standing among their peers and their clients, is at stake and they just hit a mental brick wall that says “don‘t go there!!!”. :)

cheers
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Of course, ABX is very helpful with this, too bad they couldn't bring themselves to do it.

Here is one of them spotted after being asked to take part in such a test:

giphy (6).gif
 

DVDdoug

Major Contributor
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
2,920
Likes
3,832
Arnold B. Krueger (RIP) built the 1st ABX box in the 1970's. He used to participate on the HydrogenAudio forum so one time I asked him if he had expected so much controversy. (Because to me the whole thing seems perfectly logical.) He was NOT surprised because he knew what was going-on in the audiophile community.

And I don't understand how anyone can believe that making a listening test blind makes it less reliable!
 
Top Bottom