Why are blind equipment tests bad?

[matthewpiano]

idc:I am keeping this going only to see if Matthew swears again!

No, I've cooled down now!!!!

I've given up with this thread. Its pointless.

 

[idc]

Mr Modesty:idc:

OK , I understand that, apart from since the EQ is now the last bit of kit that the signal passes through and not the amp, why is the case that we are listening to the amp? Are we not actually listening to the EQ instead?

The eq will be applied to the input, not the output. As I said earlier, most amplifiers are already engineered for a flat response using negative feedback so won't need to be equalized at all.

Thanks Mr Modesty, I get it now. However, any future amp comparisons will be in a hifi dealer's best listening room snuggled up on a settee with the wife listening to our favourite tester tracks without an equaliser in site........unlesss......

 

[Anonymous]

I would like to compare this to wine. If you, like i, enjoy a nice glass of wine you would be able to tell the differnce between say a house wine and a bottle of fine vintage. But if you were a 19 year old that didn't like wine then there isn't really going to be a noticable difference. If you dont like music then you may not be able to tell the difference between a £500 set of speakers against a £1000 set, but if you do like music the of course you'll be able to tell the difference. As with anything in life there are going to be people for and against blind testing. Me personally i'm against it, there is more to speakers etc than just the sound. Would you buy a £1000 pair of speakers if they looked like *sugar*? i know i wouldnt! looks arent everything (except if you buy B&O ) but then they have to have the performance to match the looks too.

End of rant

Regards

Justin