A Different Take on Blind Audio Testing

[Smokey]

Jon Iverson of Stereophile.com, SoundandVision, InnerFidelity and AnalogPlanet.com, talks about his interpretation of blind audio testing and what it does—and does not—reveal about the performance of audio equipments, recordings, cables and the participants in the test.

Jon went on to say that what blind testing reveal is not which equipments are better, but rather highlight personal reference of participants.

Some interesting conversation:

<iframe height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/p6kC5vck2JA?feature=player_detailpage" frameBorder="0" width="640" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Having viewed this a while before I saw this here, I agree and disagree with some of his comments. Double blind testing can reveal preference and objective differences equally based on my experience. According to Dr Floyd Tool, they have to be weighed equally, and I agree with that totally.

[Smokey]

Having viewed this a while before I saw this here, I agree and disagree with some of his comments. Double blind testing can reveal preference and objective differences equally based on my experience. According to Dr Floyd Tool, they have to be weighed equally, and I agree with that totally.

Maybe blind testing be more accurate if participants have the same preferences and taste in music. For example I like music with heavy drumming, and if I hear a component that emphasis drums/bass, then probably prefer that component.

Same thing probably can be said about objectivity of test. Some listeners say that hormonic distortion or power does not matter, while others its a first thing they look at when evaluating an audio component.