Blind listening comparisons

[tube fan]

Don't get defensive, I'm not trying to make you look foolish.

I don't see how your reply answers my question. What you are talking about is apples and oranges. If someone can't pick out expensive gear vs. inexpensive, how are you able to pick out a pair of speakers vs. others?

My point is not expensive vs inexpensive, simply A vs B. I think some people probably can pick out a piece of gear from others, just as you can pick out the AR speakers.

I am NOT claiming that people cannot pick out their favorite out of a group of components. I AM claiming, much as happens in blind wine tastings, there will be no, or very little, correlation between price and perceived quality. When I was comparing speakers blind (yes, over 45 years ago), in a group that included the famous AR3a, there was a HUGE difference between the AR3a and other (small bookshelf sized) ones (yes, a huge difference to me). I am NOT claiming someone else might not prefer one of the other speakers. I love blind testings precisely because I am looking for a bargain. Everyone, including me, is influenced by brands and advertising. I have seen many fans of expensive cult wines humbled in a blind taste test that included several lower priced wines. I have seen the same thing happen in blind comparisons between audio components. Of course, blind listening tests are much harder to conduct than blind wine ones. Nevertheless, IMO,
the conventional wisdom that holds that there is a direct correlation between price (or a famous brand name) and perceived quality, is no more true in audio than it is in audio.

[Ajani]

I am NOT claiming that people cannot pick out their favorite out of a group of components. I AM claiming, much as happens in blind wine tastings, there will be no, or very little, correlation between price and perceived quality. When I was comparing speakers blind (yes, over 45 years ago), in a group that included the famous AR3a, there was a HUGE difference between the AR3a and other (small bookshelf sized) ones (yes, a huge difference to me). I am NOT claiming someone else might not prefer one of the other speakers. I love blind testings precisely because I am looking for a bargain. Everyone, including me, is influenced by brands and advertising. I have seen many fans of expensive cult wines humbled in a blind taste test that included several lower priced wines. I have seen the same thing happen in blind comparisons between audio components. Of course, blind listening tests are much harder to conduct than blind wine ones. Nevertheless, IMO,
the conventional wisdom that holds that there is a direct correlation between price (or a famous brand name) and perceived quality, is no more true in audio than it is in audio.

The question I have is whether you are referring to an arbitrary grouping of products from various brands, at different prices in the blind listening test? Or a similar grouping of products from similar/the same brands, at different prices?

Let me explain what I mean:

Test A:

Magnepan MMG $600
Totem Arro $1400
Klipsch Cornwall $3500
B&W 802D $8000?

Test B:

Monitor Audio Bronze BX5 $800
Monitor Audio Silver RX6 $1250
Monitor Audio Gold GX200 $3500?
Monitor Audio Platinum PL200 $8000

In Test A, all the speakers are sufficiently different in design and sound quality, that I could easily imagine there being very little relationship between price and listener preferences... If you love the planar sound, then you might well pick the cheapest speaker of the lot (the MMG)...

In Test B, all the speakers are from the same manufacturer but vary in price... So I would more readily expect there to be a clear relationship between price and listener preferences...

[tube fan]

The question I have is whether you are referring to an arbitrary grouping of products from various brands, at different prices in the blind listening test? Or a similar grouping of products from similar/the same brands, at different prices?

Let me explain what I mean:

Test A:

Magnepan MMG $600
Totem Arro $1400
Klipsch Cornwall $3500
B&W 802D $8000?

Test B:

Monitor Audio Bronze BX5 $800
Monitor Audio Silver RX6 $1250
Monitor Audio Gold GX200 $3500?
Monitor Audio Platinum PL200 $8000

In Test A, all the speakers are sufficiently different in design and sound quality, that I could easily imagine there being very little relationship between price and listener preferences... If you love the planar sound, then you might well pick the cheapest speaker of the lot (the MMG)...

In Test B, all the speakers are from the same manufacturer but vary in price... So I would more readily expect there to be a clear relationship between price and listener preferences...

I am referring to both type of tests. Say compare various Quad speakers with a Quad 57; compare various Magnepan speakers, 1.6, 1.7, 3.6, and 20.1; compare various Audio Note speakers (these differ wildly in price).
The NYT's Robin Goldstein conducted hundreds of blind wine tests. The Beringer $11 Cab outscored their $120 Private Reserve Cab. The same thing would happen in blind listening tests IMO.

As for speakers in a type A test I would like to hear: Magnepan 1.7, The old and new Gallo speakers, the Audio Note J and E ($7500 version), DeVore speakers ($3700 Gibbon, $16,800 Silverback Reference, and $6500 Gibbon 9), Teresonic Ingenium Silver with more expensive ones: Vandersteen Model seven, Wilson Maxx and Sasha, Magico V5 or 3. Many lists could be as good.

[Ajani]

I am referring to both type of tests. Say compare various Quad speakers with a Quad 57; compare various Magnepan speakers, 1.6, 1.7, 3.6, and 20.1; compare various Audio Note speakers (these differ wildly in price).
The NYT's Robin Goldstein conducted hundreds of blind wine tests. The Beringer $11 Cab outscored their $120 Private Reserve Cab. The same thing would happen in blind listening tests IMO.

As for speakers in a type A test I would like to hear: Magnepan 1.7, The old and new Gallo speakers, the Audio Note J and E ($7500 version), DeVore speakers ($3700 Gibbon, $16,800 Silverback Reference, and $6500 Gibbon 9), Teresonic Ingenium Silver with more expensive ones: Vandersteen Model seven, Wilson Maxx and Sasha, Magico V5 or 3. Many lists could be as good.

So in Test type B, you think persons might chose the cheapest Monitor Audio, Audio Note or Magnepan speakers over their more expensive siblings? Intriguing... I could imagine persons not hearing a significant difference between cheaper and more expensive models, but I can't say I'd really considered them straight out preferring the cheaper models...

[RGA]

So in Test type B, you think persons might chose the cheapest Monitor Audio, Audio Note or Magnepan speakers over their more expensive siblings? Intriguing... I could imagine persons not hearing a significant difference between cheaper and more expensive models, but I can't say I'd really considered them straight out preferring the cheaper models...

I suppose it could happen depending on the room. Bass shy speakers tend to sound faster and cleaner. Speakers with good solid bass can also be heard as being distorted (when it's just bass). Thus a lower model could be picked out as being better. I find this with most of the DBTs. They tend to be fairly short auditions - make a selection - speakers with bright sound tend to be preferred on short duration sessions and may very well be chosen in a blind test. Good long tests have not been done. Which may explain why many find metalic tweeters fatiguing over long listening sessions but they often do well in DBT style tests.

[RGA]

I am referring to both type of tests. Say compare various Quad speakers with a Quad 57; compare various Magnepan speakers, 1.6, 1.7, 3.6, and 20.1; compare various Audio Note speakers (these differ wildly in price).
The NYT's Robin Goldstein conducted hundreds of blind wine tests. The Beringer $11 Cab outscored their $120 Private Reserve Cab. The same thing would happen in blind listening tests IMO.

As for speakers in a type A test I would like to hear: Magnepan 1.7, The old and new Gallo speakers, the Audio Note J and E ($7500 version), DeVore speakers ($3700 Gibbon, $16,800 Silverback Reference, and $6500 Gibbon 9), Teresonic Ingenium Silver with more expensive ones: Vandersteen Model seven, Wilson Maxx and Sasha, Magico V5 or 3. Many lists could be as good.

I think it will be very easy to detect a difference between different speaker lines. Comparing an Audio Note J or E (any model at any price) versus a Magnepan (any model) versus a Vandersteen (any Model).

It would be more difficult to detect differences between the models of a given line - perhaps depending on the music played. But an E or 20.1 has more bass than a J or 3.6 and if it is blind level matched and you play bass you will detect the difference - if you don't play bass it may become more difficult because the same general technology is used. But in the case of Audio Note - they use different tweeters and different woofers. So in some cases you are paying more for a Higher High Efficiency driver to make it more usable for lower powered amps - it may not really be a very big improvement in sound over the non HE version. But once the dollars start to rise some of it becomes bragging rights over actual sound quality benefits and one has to truly temper their ability to spend with what they're actually getting. Still, to people very very familiar with the house sound of a product line then they will arguably hear more improvement in the $50k version of the speaker over the $10k version more than someone who is not nearly as familiar with the products.

[tube fan]

I think it will be very easy to detect a difference between different speaker lines. Comparing an Audio Note J or E (any model at any price) versus a Magnepan (any model) versus a Vandersteen (any Model).

It would be more difficult to detect differences between the models of a given line - perhaps depending on the music played. But an E or 20.1 has more bass than a J or 3.6 and if it is blind level matched and you play bass you will detect the difference - if you don't play bass it may become more difficult because the same general technology is used. But in the case of Audio Note - they use different tweeters and different woofers. So in some cases you are paying more for a Higher High Efficiency driver to make it more usable for lower powered amps - it may not really be a very big improvement in sound over the non HE version. But once the dollars start to rise some of it becomes bragging rights over actual sound quality benefits and one has to truly temper their ability to spend with what they're actually getting. Still, to people very very familiar with the house sound of a product line then they will arguably hear more improvement in the $50k version of the speaker over the $10k version more than someone who is not nearly as familiar with the products.

I'm really talking about triple blind tests: those tacking the test don't know what's in the test. They are told to rate the overall sound, from highest to lowest. Yes, a given piece of equipment may have more extended lows (or highs), and still be rated below some other equipment in perceived quality. The Beringer Private Reserve is darker, higher in alcohol, and higher in the use of oak, than their $11 cab (all easily determined). The blind testers still preferred the $11 wine over the $120 one. I have heard that many prefer the Magnapan 1.7 over the 20.1, at 5 times the price. One of the salesmen at the Audio Note room at the CAS admitted that he preferred the J to the various E speakers in most smaller rooms, like the one at the CAS.

[RGA]

I'm really talking about triple blind tests: those tacking the test don't know what's in the test. They are told to rate the overall sound, from highest to lowest. Yes, a given piece of equipment may have more extended lows (or highs), and still be rated below some other equipment in perceived quality. The Beringer Private Reserve is darker, higher in alcohol, and higher in the use of oak, than their $11 cab (all easily determined). The blind testers still preferred the $11 wine over the $120 one. I have heard that many prefer the Magnapan 1.7 over the 20.1, at 5 times the price. One of the salesmen at the Audio Note room at the CAS admitted that he preferred the J to the various E speakers in most smaller rooms, like the one at the CAS.

Then the only magazine for you would be Hi-Fi Choice. The take say 6-12 amplifiers. A panel of expert listeners who are both reviewers and the manufacturers of the products in the test. Listen blind level matched and make notes on the products. Then at the end they find out which was which. What is interesting is that some of the actual manufacturer/designers don't even choose their own products - they pick a cheaper competing product as being the best. Which is kind of funny.

The Stereophile link I posted noted the same thing. Some of the top Solid State amp makers including the guy from Meridian chose an old less expensive tube amplifier over his own top end SS product. A lot of the big English makers have sat in those sessions.

[tube fan]

Then the only magazine for you would be Hi-Fi Choice. The take say 6-12 amplifiers. A panel of expert listeners who are both reviewers and the manufacturers of the products in the test. Listen blind level matched and make notes on the products. Then at the end they find out which was which. What is interesting is that some of the actual manufacturer/designers don't even choose their own products - they pick a cheaper competing product as being the best. Which is kind of funny.

The Stereophile link I posted noted the same thing. Some of the top Solid State amp makers including the guy from Meridian chose an old less expensive tube amplifier over his own top end SS product. A lot of the big English makers have sat in those sessions.

Yes, this is what I am looking for! I need to look into zero feedback amps. Need to get Hi-Fi Choice.

[Ajani]

I'm really talking about triple blind tests: those tacking the test don't know what's in the test. They are told to rate the overall sound, from highest to lowest. Yes, a given piece of equipment may have more extended lows (or highs), and still be rated below some other equipment in perceived quality. The Beringer Private Reserve is darker, higher in alcohol, and higher in the use of oak, than their $11 cab (all easily determined). The blind testers still preferred the $11 wine over the $120 one. I have heard that many prefer the Magnapan 1.7 over the 20.1, at 5 times the price. One of the salesmen at the Audio Note room at the CAS admitted that he preferred the J to the various E speakers in most smaller rooms, like the one at the CAS.

Interesting analogy... It leaves me wondering if we (audiophiles) train ourselves to "like" products that the average Joe wouldn't like...

[tube fan]

Interesting analogy... It leaves me wondering if we (audiophiles) train ourselves to "like" products that the average Joe wouldn't like...

The exact same thing happens to "wine lovers". They all too often
learn to rate high alcoholic, dark, low acidic, fruit bombs highly, just like Parker and the Wine Spectator do. These wines are just horrible with food. Many expensive, thousand watt amps are crap if you actually listen to them. Ditto for $10,000 CD players and $50,000 ss amps. I asked 5 women at the recent CAS what was their favorite room and 4 replied "the audio note" room!!! They did NOT hesitate to answer. It was my second favorite room, but then they were not playing analogue, and I DO have a preference for analogue.

[Geoffcin]

Interesting analogy... It leaves me wondering if we (audiophiles) train ourselves to "like" products that the average Joe wouldn't like...

I would not generalize what an "audiophile" likes. Some of us are into truth, others are into what they perceive as "beautiful" regardless of how euphonic the sound is.

For example;

Zero-feedback amps ALL have high levels of second order harmonic distortion. SET amps ALL have reactive impedance loading issues, yet this doesn't stop audiophiles from seeking these flawed designs out. Even calling them preferable to more realistic and truthful-to-the-original-sound (High Fidelity) systems.