Yes, they do. Can you show me one article by a "professor" demonstrating that two different wines couldn't be distinguished blind? Professors do double blind tests because they're after what's the right answer, not promotion and fashion marketing.
Remember, for the third time, "distinguish" and "prefer" are two different terms.
Remember, for the third time, "distinguish" and "prefer" are two different terms.
I prefer that you distinguish between product topics that are productive and just the same old s....
Now what I find interesting is the tale of chicken sexers. They spend their 10,000 hours studying and then can tell by looking at a stage when most folks can't. They often can't explain exactly what the differences are verbally. Since they are paid for the work they do and fined when they get it wrong, the final results are accepted.
I suspect the ability to hear things others do not is sort of like that. There are particular distortion signatures that occur very infrequently, that with training (most self taught so far for audio, but some examples of "Listener Calibration") can be used to distinguish audio equipment characteristics. Because they are infrequent they can actually be fairly "Loud" (Say -25 below the instantaneous level) and easy to pick out, once trained to listen for them.
Now if a double blind test does not include these cues, then the results will be skewed.
The other issue is of course making sure the test is actually switching between sources correctly. I am still looking for a switch that measures much better than audio cables.
Now I do have some idea of what kinds of cues may be present that most miss. The ideas are based on the remarks used while doing comparisons. Remind me in 6 weeks and I may be able to post some tests.
ES
Now what I find interesting is the tale of chicken sexers. They spend their 10,000 hours studying and then can tell by looking at a stage when most folks can't. They often can't explain exactly what the differences are verbally. Since they are paid for the work they do and fined when they get it wrong, the final results are accepted.
I suspect the ability to hear things others do not is sort of like that. There are particular distortion signatures that occur very infrequently, that with training (most self taught so far for audio, but some examples of "Listener Calibration") can be used to distinguish audio equipment characteristics. Because they are infrequent they can actually be fairly "Loud" (Say -25 below the instantaneous level) and easy to pick out, once trained to listen for them.
Now if a double blind test does not include these cues, then the results will be skewed.
The other issue is of course making sure the test is actually switching between sources correctly. I am still looking for a switch that measures much better than audio cables.
Now I do have some idea of what kinds of cues may be present that most miss. The ideas are based on the remarks used while doing comparisons. Remind me in 6 weeks and I may be able to post some tests.
ES
I take it you didn't actually read the actual paper, since nowhere in there is it suggested that the wines couldn't be distinguished. It was a classic demonstration of the need for double blind tests to remove bias and preconception. OK, want to try again?
One of the fellows who used to work here, participated in wine tastings. For fun one time he took Thunderbird! He presented it as a popular wine for folks around where he work. The homeless shelter was just down the block.
It was well accepted and picked as a favorite by a few folks.
He actually left me a bottle which I served to more than one person who had an interest in wine. All but one thought it a good wine.
So it while it may be easy to distinguish one wine from another, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder.
100% correct. One way I can manipulate a red wine so that tyros prefer it but experts hate it is to add a little residual sugar and a little extra alcohol. Thunderbird is the reductio ad absurdum of that observation.
Sure you can, it's trivial. People do it every day and the literature is full of it. Ask anyone with a WSET, MS, or MW certification or who sits on judging panels at the Cal State Fairs. They all have to identify wines double blind to qualify.
There are sonic differences Wahab, it may be noise, which add more grain and hardness to the sound, even when not grainy, sometimes , dead sounding is enuff to turn you off on a product...
Most tubes do that to me , where Class-d is too much grain and hardness , makes it difficult to live with ...
Long term testing, did you give it to Stevie Wonder ...... 
Mr. Curl
In here
I made it clear (*)that what I have been benefited from this thread is through what all the participants have offered themselves, most often than not OT stuff.
From Your contribution, I have “kept note” of topologies suggested, the only topic that you became “technical”. The rest were and are personal preferences - -passive components choice, discrete v. ICs, special internal wires, interconnects ect-, with no hard data for support, as I would expect from a designer but repeatedly justified by the “what is needed to get an A rating in the X High End Magazine” saga.
I am sorry if I expect from you to do better here.
I know you can. (**)
But probably you may not intend to. (I still remember your suggestion -warning?- to Joachim not to give off that much on RIAA preamp. innovative designs here for free to the masses. Joachim must have been blind! Lots of sub $100 implementable and documented designs so far).
My –often rude- comments do not target You as a person, rather Your insistence to guide everything towards (or value everything acc. to) the High End MARKET norms.
Visualize it as DIY v. MARKET philosophy and intentions conflict.
George
(*)Simon has made an open question
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analog-line-level/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2258.html#post2993886
(**) Like your emphasis on meticulous cleaning the component leads before soldering. Thank You.
So so true. I have an "inside" guy at Trader Joe's who calls me to alert me to what he considers to be good values in wine and that he expects to sell out rapidly.
I have learned that he likes something a trifle "off-dry". I generally do not, with the exception of the occasional top-notch Riesling with a nice acid backbone. Otherwise, it's the very-infrequent full-throttle sticky wines, or I'd prefer not to bother.
So when I get the heads-up from Howie I have to taste first before committing to any quantity. Otherwise I wind up with wines ideal for barbecues and picnics --- that is, for others to drink. And the other "secret" there is to make sure they don't get too warm.
Having said that, I have enjoyed, over the years, persuading people who protest that fine wine, particularly red wine, is wasted on them, to taste a properly-aged red. Some have thereafter protested that their new-found appreciation is more a curse than a blessing.
Reminds me of the night i spent in a park, just missed the ferry home (after a month of backpacking in Scotland and the UK Lake District)
At 6 in the morning, 2 volunteers from the local SA woke us up, returned five minutes later with an old thermos and thoroughly burnt toast, wrapped in aluminum foil.
Told us to just leave the thermos bottle on the grass when we left.
The sugar content blasted the fillings off your teeth, best darn coffee i recall having.
After C&T brekkie, i put on my $200 US manufacture hiking shoes, rolled up the $500 & 90% goose down sleeping bag, buckled up the >>$1K Lowe backpack & tent, both specifically designed for a Nanga Parbat expedition tour a few years before, and left for the docks.
Never look a bum in the mouth, when he hands you a Thunderbird.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.