Can anyone recall some blind or double-blind audio or speaker tests?

[John...]

Please no Stevie Wonder jokes etc.

I'm mostly interested if anyone can recall listening tests where people are placed in a room, perhaps blind folded or seated behind a screen where they can't see the speakers or performers on the stage, or perhaps they're simply seated facing away from the performance.

The audio engineer (or tester) then plays recordings and possibly even further manipulates the sound being produced by the speakers to create a most life like sound. For example: keys being jingled, a conversation between people, singing, a violin being played, a piano, drums, then more complex sounds all played or performed simultaneously. Were listeners able to tell the recordings/sound processing vs when people performed the same task? What speakers were used and what year was the test carried out? I realize their are tons of pit falls to these tests? Namely, if a speaker is promoted then of course the results have to be taken with a grain of salt until it can be proven the audio engineer was also blind to the speakers that would next be played. That's fairly impossible if he's also using studio effects. He'd then have to know how the effects would be played on each speaker. In a way, I'd almost like if no speaker brands are mentioned. At least then I'd know the study was for some audio study and not a promotional piece by a speaker company.

How do self avowed audiophiles perceive sound vs the general public vs actual experts? Can anyone recall the statistics. I'm guessing most people don't know what they like or how to discern particular sounds. I wouldn't be shocked at all if people's answers to follow up questions on which sound they like better differed from their perceptions of which they'd like better. The common theme among people is that they love the sound of live instruments being played over a recording, but that they also like studio mastered reproductions of their favorite bands because the live albums always have timing and vocal problems. That seems reasonable to me. But who knows, given the right speaker system maybe I too could learn to hate a live performance at a symphony. haha

I'm also curious about any other tests. I'm aware of the equal loudness frequency detectability curve. Granted this resulted from a blind test of sorts because the people were not told which frequencies were playing (as far as I know), but that's not the crucial aspect of the test. We learned how humans ears perceive sound and the results might not have been dramatically affected by knowing which frequencies were playing.

I curious to know how actual humans perceive sounds and/or the findings related to sound recreation.

Please don't think I'm trying to find the ultimate speaker test or recommendation. I want to understand how humans actually hear. And if a few speaker brands are mentioned, then so be it.

Any and all entertaining anecdotes from audio tests concerning test subjects would be greatly appreciated.

 

[TheWarrior]

There is a wealth of knowledge to be obtained from Floyd Toole.

Also search 'Harman White Papers' for further reading. Floyd has a book out, with another coming soon.

 

[Speedskater]

Of course Harman does them all the time, but a couple of decades ago Stereophile magazine did a few. Unfortunately their golden ear reviewers couldn't repeat the finding over a weekend test. So Stereophile went back to sighted test, where the golden ears did much better.

 

[TheWarrior]

Of course Harman does them all the time, but a couple of decades ago Stereophile magazine did a few. Unfortunately their golden ear reviewers couldn't repeat the finding over a weekend test. So Stereophile went back to sighted test, where the golden ears did much better.

Yeah when Floyd went to Harman, no one could remember having done even a single blind test. He goes on about it in the video. His series of double blind tests quickly made the supposed 'professionals' realize how greatly bias effects everything.

 

[zieglj01]

Bookshelf speaker test
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/review-clash-minispeakers

 

[zieglj01]

Audioholics article
http://www.audioholics.com/how-to-shop/revealing-flaws-in-the-loudspeaker-demo-double-blind-test

 

[Audiosaur]

There is a wealth of knowledge to be obtained from Floyd Toole.

Also search 'Harman White Papers' for further reading. Floyd has a book out, with another coming soon.

I watched the whole video for the first time today. Very interesting. Dr Toole would be a fascinating dinner guest!

 

[TheWarrior]

I watched the whole video for the first time today. Very interesting. Dr Toole would be a fascinating dinner guest!

His book 'Sound Reproduction: Loudspeakers and Rooms' should be requisite reading for anyone claiming to be an audiophile and wanting to achieve the best of the best in performance from their speakers and room. There's just ALOT of information and data to digest. It is a lifetime of work, after all.

His next book should be out in August. He's throwing down the gauntlet on a lot of pseudoscience in our industry, up to and including various forms of auto room correction.

One thing worth mentioning is the second link @zieglj01 posted: that article illustrates the problems of an incorrectly performed d/b test. One thing Harman brings is a huge sum of money, so here is the infamous Harman 'Speaker Shuffler'.



The whole test is computer controlled with the user selecting a 1-10 score(to tenth place decimal) on an iPad for each of 4 speakers played in mono. (mono, because listeners are far more fussy with a single speaker, stereo listening can mask a lot of problems) The hydraulic shuffler repositions each speaker in just a few seconds while the listener stays behind a blind screen in a treated listening room. Each of the 4 speakers is compared in four different series where the music is changed and the speakers are shuffled - you never know what you're listening to. The results are then compared to show preference, but the listeners ears are paramount as there is a metric for how consistently you rated the same speaker in each of the four series. Bias is eliminated and any faults fall back on the listener, which is why they generally select and train listeners; You can actually download the program they made 'Harman- How to listen'. (very difficult on laptop speakers, I was only able to reach level 4 or 5 but some music would bump me back down cause I couldn't hear any difference)

Point is, and to the OP, science wins! All of the links I gave will provide exactly what you're looking for.

 

[charmerci]

I think the basic FUNDAMENTAL problem with a number of double blind tests is that they are done in unfamiliar environments, with unfamiliar equipment - often with unfamiliar speakers.

I think to validate double blind tests for audio, one could hear differences if you compare other audio equipment in YOUR room against YOUR own equipment that you are familiar with. (Given of course, there's not a ton of outside noise interfering with the sound.)

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/894awsi/

For over 20 years, I firmly believed that there were NO differences in the way that interconnects affect the sound - until I bought a decent pair and heard a difference completely not expecting it!

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I think the basic FUNDAMENTAL problem with a number of double blind tests is that they are done in unfamiliar environments, with unfamiliar equipment - often with unfamiliar speakers.

I think to validate double blind tests for audio, one could hear differences if you compare other audio equipment in YOUR room against YOUR own equipment that you are familiar with. (Given of course, there's not a ton of outside noise interfering with the sound.)

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/894awsi/

For over 20 years, I firmly believed that there were NO differences in the way that interconnects affect the sound - until I bought a decent pair and heard a difference completely not expecting it!

But that would rule out a controlled test, amenable to statistical analysis, with a large number of subjects. I think any audible differences in speakers would emerge whether or not you were familiar with the surroundings or equipment, unless there were gross problems with either. And lots of people say they can hear differences in interconnects, but that's not reliable evidence, at least not for the Federal Trade Commission. Fortunately we never waded into the swamp of audio claims (other than amplifier power specs).

 

[charmerci]

Yes but saying that a bunch of people can't hear or see something doesn't invalidate its existence. Gamma rays anyone?

 

[lovinthehd]

Yes but saying that a bunch of people can't hear or see something doesn't invalidate its existence. Gamma rays anyone?

Placebos anyone?

 

[charmerci]

Placebos anyone?

So you're saying gamma rays don't exist?

 

[lovinthehd]

So you're saying gamma rays don't exist?

Only in your interconnects.

 

[Beave]

I think the basic FUNDAMENTAL problem with a number of double blind tests is that they are done in unfamiliar environments, with unfamiliar equipment - often with unfamiliar speakers.

I think to validate double blind tests for audio, one could hear differences if you compare other audio equipment in YOUR room against YOUR own equipment that you are familiar with. (Given of course, there's not a ton of outside noise interfering with the sound.)

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/894awsi/

For over 20 years, I firmly believed that there were NO differences in the way that interconnects affect the sound - until I bought a decent pair and heard a difference completely not expecting it!

How did you determine that interconnects affect the sound? A double blind test? Single blind?

And in what way(s) did they affect the sound?

 

[shadyJ]

Yes but saying that a bunch of people can't hear or see something doesn't invalidate its existence. Gamma rays anyone?

Gamma rays can be detected, so that does not support any kind of subjectivist arguement. Besides, while you can't see or hear Gamma rays, you sure can feel the effects of them, in strong enough doses.

 

[charmerci]

How did you determine that interconnects affect the sound? A double blind test? Single blind?

And in what way(s) did they affect the sound?

Well, the first time was in 2013 so I can't remember exactly what or how it sounded better. I simply wasn't expecting it at all but it was clearly there.

I can hear differences today between others but I'd rather just leave it there but because I don't want to hear from people who don't know me who say that I can't hear what I hear. Anyone is welcome to come to my place, change them while I'm out of the room and I'll be right. Otherwise, I don't really want to have to defend myself.

 

[Beave]

Fair enough.

As an EE who worked on audio electronics for many years, including testing various interconnects that we sometimes included/shipped with our product, I'll give the standard reply:

1. Psychological biases, both conscious and unconscious, influence what we hear - or rather, what we think we hear. Nobody is immune. Can you hear the differences when you don't know which cable is being used? Try a blinded test and you might surprise yourself.

2. There's always the possibility that your previous interconnects were somehow defective, or that your newer, more exotic ones are purposefully designed to have such high capacitance or inductance that they alter the signal in meaningful ways. Unlikely, but possible.

As for your challenge of going to your place, will you agree to pay my travel fees if I show that you really can't hear a difference when the identity of which cables are used is hidden from you? I've always wanted to go back to Flagstaff (haven't been since 1999).

 

[charmerci]

Fair enough.

As an EE who worked on audio electronics for many years, including testing various interconnects that we sometimes included/shipped with our product, I'll give the standard reply:

1. Psychological biases, both conscious and unconscious, influence what we hear - or rather, what we think we hear. Nobody is immune. Can you hear the differences when you don't know which cable is being used? Try a blinded test and you might surprise yourself.

2. There's always the possibility that your previous interconnects were somehow defective, or that your newer, more exotic ones are purposefully designed to have such high capacitance or inductance that they alter the signal in meaningful ways. Unlikely, but possible.

As for your challenge of going to your place, will you agree to pay my travel fees if I show that you really can't hear a difference when the identity of which cables are used is hidden from you? I've always wanted to go back to Flagstaff (haven't been since 1999).

1) Sure, I understand biases. No, I haven't done blinded test.

2) They went from throwaway cables to Monoprice (where I first heard differences) to soundsilver, kabeldirekt, Burson, Morrow MA1.1's, Straightwire to Grover Huffman.

3) Ha! You're trying to disprove me so YOU have to pay for your own trip! Anyway, I've got to change that, I live in Moab Utah now, Arches National Park area. Crazy busy most of the year now.

 

[charmerci]

Also Beave, thanks for being very reasonable. I'm trying to find that NPR article where there's a shade of color that only a few people can see - though my time will be limited here.