The double blind auditions thread - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Solid State

Solid State Talk all about solid state amplification.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th August 2011, 06:19 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
Generally, the listener has switching control in that sort of format. In other test formats (e.g., sorting), the listener also has control of which items are being auditioned.

In several decades of sensory testing experience, I have never run across the concept of reduced test validity with knowledge of when switching takes place. Do you have a cite for that?
No citation, sorry. The fact that you have never run across this concept shows a lot about the state of 'research' in the audio world, IMO.

As I see it, the basic situation in most 'listening tests' is that the listeners are quite sure that they can tell the difference between the units under test. My attitude is: 'Prove it'.
The listener should be presented with random samples from the 'DUT's. Sometimes the same unit will be presented several times in succession, sometimes the unit will change. The listener should identify 'which is which' to prove that he/she can indeed hear a difference.

To eliminate cues (like counting relay clicks) the audio should be silenced during the switching.

Letting the listener control the switching is a move in the wrong direction, IMO.

Most 'tests' seem to be of the 'Now you are listening to unit A' type, which really don't meet even the slackest criteria for validity.

All IMO.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 06:24 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlsem View Post
This isn't entirely true either since when the "switch" occurs one doesn't know whether the DUT is changed or if it remains the same. In other words, the switching should be as random as possible.

John
That's basically what I meant. For most people, 'switch' means 'change to something different'.

If 'switch' means 'change to something different or just pretend to change to something different but really keep things unchanged', then I agree with your point.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 07:27 PM   #23
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaGuy View Post
No citation, sorry. The fact that you have never run across this concept shows a lot about the state of 'research' in the audio world, IMO.
It's also unknown in organoleptics, haptics, and optics (I've worked extensively in the first two). So there doesn't seem to be any support for this assertion.

Quote:
Most 'tests' seem to be of the 'Now you are listening to unit A' type, which really don't meet even the slackest criteria for validity.
The scare quotes are appropriate. Those aren't tests, they're sales efforts.

Quote:
Sometimes the same unit will be presented several times in succession, sometimes the unit will change. The listener should identify 'which is which' to prove that he/she can indeed hear a difference.
That is only one possible test format. There are many others which are perfectly valid.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 08:57 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
That is only one possible test format. There are many others which are perfectly valid.
What are some of the other ways to test the subject's claim that he/she can identify different audio components? (ie without presenting the same unit in successive trials, which would certainly happen (eventually) with random presentations...)
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 09:07 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
sofaspud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Antonio
Quote:
Letting the listener control
Maybe this is a better definition of double-blind? Not that neither party knows, but that neither party controls.
__________________
It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from enquiry. - Thomas Paine
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 09:16 PM   #26
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaGuy View Post
What are some of the other ways to test the subject's claim that he/she can identify different audio components? (ie without presenting the same unit in successive trials, which would certainly happen (eventually) with random presentations...)
I'll plug Linear Audio again- see my article in Volume 2, to be released in about 2 weeks or so. DBT is absolutely necessary, but random presentation is just one possible format for DBT.

One example which I mentioned before was the data compression trials I did.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 09:21 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
This is a post from member millwood. i think he has the point right on and am totally agree with him
Quote:
that's absolutely true. the study on "placebo effect" is just picking up right now and a lot of interesting things have come out of it. just a few examples:

a) there is a million dollar challenge to anyone who can tell, in a double-blind test, a reference amp from any of your amps, including low-performance car amps. The challenge has been in existence for at least 10 years and no one has been able to take it.

b) in drug testing, 80% of the FDA-approved drugs are LESS effective than sugar pills.

c) in a recent study, almost all hotel maids lost weight AFTER being told that their workload was harder than exercise, against their control group.

d) in another recent study, patients who did not receive acupunture but was told otherwise reported overwhelming improvement from their "fake" acupunture sessions.

e) in a study done in the 1980s, a group of musicians who swore that they could tell tube amps from solid state amps failed a double blind test. The only person who could consistently pick a tube amp from a solid state amp did so by listening to the excessive hum in the tube amp.

f) Bob Carver, who designed Phase Liner, Carver and Sunfire hi-fi amps, challenged the hi-fi establishment in the 1980s by stating that he could mod his amps to sound like any hi-fi amp. the whole experience, called the "Great Hi-Fi challenge" was done in the 1980s. Carver first replicated the sound of ML-2 for Audio Critic (a high-end audio mag back then), and no Audio Critic editors could tell them apart. Carver then replicated the sound of a Conrad-Johnson (then sold for over $20K, in 1985), in less than two days, and without opening up his own amp, for Stereophile (an audio mag). No Stereophile editors could tell the $500 Carver (solid state) amps from $20K Conrad-Johnson (a tube amp).

g) my own experience suggests that 1) in a controlled environment and assuming the amps are working within their own performance envelope, it is next to impossible to tell two reasonably good amps apart; b) it is extremely easy to tell two speakers apart.

Considering that speakers routinely distort 10%, and amps in the less than 1% territory, it is not difficult to understand why that's the case.

and so far, out of millions of "hi-end" cable / interconnect manufacturers who claim that their products will make a "night-and-day" difference for their owners, not a single one of them have agreed to subject their products and themselves to a double-blind test.

That tells you how much faith they have in their own products.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 09:54 PM   #28
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
I made that suggestion and got a non-answer. Res ipsa and all that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk95100 View Post
Then publisch the test and its results, so others can verify it.

I did answer ... What ..?

Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
Yes i saw that and I'm no longer involved in the industry so not exposed to or able to perform such test anymore, well apart from my own personal satisfaction,A/B/ testing ..

.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 10:20 PM   #29
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Yes, but you claimed to have done the tests in the past. So.. write them up in detail with methods, setup, controls, and results.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2011, 10:52 PM   #30
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
diyAudio Member
 
a.wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Sy that was 15 yrs ago , them der notes and data are long gone .......
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Double blind test of cheap/fake phono connectors anyone? cr0wl3y Everything Else 3 26th February 2011 02:41 PM
ABX double blind comparator - original Speaker Dude Swap Meet 4 18th March 2008 07:40 PM
Double Blind Testing pjpoes Everything Else 75 25th September 2005 01:31 PM
GainClone PS auditions analog_sa Chip Amps 27 28th October 2003 11:14 PM
Capacitors and double-blind listening tests MarcelvdG Parts 9 24th May 2003 02:39 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2