It was not an ABX test, it was a blind comparison test. There is a big difference. They also ran lots under the title The Big Question and all credit to the magazine for doing so as it kicked up lots of interesting results.steve_1979 said:So, on one of the rare occasions when WHF run an unbiased blind ABX test they 'struggle to find any difference'. But whenever they do a biased sighted review they claim to be able to see/hear big differences between cables.idc said:WHF have done a number of blind comparison tests, including HDMI cables. From my blog
14 - What Hifi, Blind Test of HDMI cables, July 2010
Another What Hifi test of three forum members who are unaware that the change being made is with three HDMI cables. As far as they know equipment could be being changed. The cables are a freebie, a Chord costing £75 and a QED costing £150. Throughout the test all three struggle to find any difference, but are more confident that there is a difference in the sound rather than the picture. They preferred the freebie cable over the Chord one and found it to be as good as the most expensive QED. That result is common in blind testing and really differenentiates it from ABX tests.
The result is also different from the sighted test where the QED got the most stars and best review. I think that information is iseful and accurate and shows how under different conditions cables sound different. So as everyone says, try before you buy.
Could somebody remind me again why they never do any blind tests on digital cables when they review them?
Furthermore the claims that during sighted testing differences can be heard are true, they can, we have a ton of evidence to prove that.
From that you then make your purchase decisions.
Chebby, why do you participate in threads that do not interest you? I do not find threads on record players very interesting, but you do not find me joining in and moaning they are boring.