Following on from the ABX thread; when the only objective is to determine, by ear, which system/component produces the more preferable sound are there any situations where a sighted test would be superior to a blind test?
Sighted tests -v- blind tests
- Thread starter byakuya83
- Start date
matt49
Well-known member
Al ears
Well-known member
DocG
Well-known member
steve_1979
Well-known member
professorhat
Well-known member
I respectfully request that responses be on-topic and helpful.
Quoting only part of my question is not at all helpful.
Please do not attempt to derail this thread.
Quoting only part of my question is not at all helpful.
Please do not attempt to derail this thread.
professorhat
Well-known member
professorhat said:
I think professorhat makes a valid point.
Often we see some item that we think we would like to own. We then 'audition' it so that we can detemine whether it has some characteristic which might be offensive to us. If it passes that test, we probably go ahead and buy it. Or keep it if we have already made the purchase.
Such a simple test is the usually the basis for selection, ime. It's quick and simple, and justifies an already pre-determined (probably) purchase decision, or halts the process, if an adverse situation occurs.
JC
Used to do it, don't bother anymore. Too many minimal differences in digital sources, too little difference to get agitated over with cables of pretty much any sort, only thing I'll listen to before buying these days are speakers. The rest are fair game. Includes my last two Onkyo amps incidentally, both of which were keepers in their own right, the current one likely to last a bit longer than the 8050 did.
byakuya83 said:
yes, when you're worried about the asthetics of an item, a blind test isn't much good then is it
cheeseboy said:byakuya83 said:
yes, when you're worried about the asthetics of an item, a blind test isn't much good then is it
Does this apply to very expensive interconnect and mains cables ?
I certainly would want to blind test those, before parting with any money.
In fact, personally, I wouldn't bother testing them at all for my own use, as I'm satisfied that they are 'foo', but I might want to actually prove that. In that endevour, a carefully arranged ABX blind test is essential, imo, based purely on the lilehood of wasting a lot of money.
JC
steve_1979
Well-known member
jcbrum said:
I felt the same when I listened to the Naim UnityQute. The sound was quite good (within its 30wpc limits) but it's the way it looks and feels in use that makes it good.
Esp if you're handing over £300 for the likes of the Clearer Audio one that Cno linked to the other week. Audio Note's higher end cables at £5000 a pop might just also squeeze into this category.
...when the only objective is to determine, by ear, which system/component produces the more preferable sound...
I didn't wish to focus on aesthetics or practicality. I think some are answering a different question.
Professor Hat, how does auditioning when sighted assist in achieving the objective?
I didn't wish to focus on aesthetics or practicality. I think some are answering a different question.
Professor Hat, how does auditioning when sighted assist in achieving the objective?
My spell checker seems to have stopped working on this forum. Donno why, Typo's are a nuisance. - JC
steve_1979
Well-known member
byakuya83 said:
byakuya83 said:
In that case no, I think blind testing will always be the better option if you're ONLY wanting to compare the sound and nothing else.
byakuya83 said:
If the only objective is to determine by ear, - then visionary influences definitely have to be excluded.
JC
I think you mean visual influences, brum me old chum, though visionary would indeed be interesting!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram