Do you associate this phenomena in any way to blind/double blind testing? Does it more validate or invalidate it in your opinion? or totally different part of the brain working?
What is Your Test for Comparing Two Audio Components?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
different part of the brain working? don't know really. maybe more that we find ways to be fully engaged to what we 'HEAR' and 'FEEL'. and not to what we see or any baggage we bring to the listening that might cause a bias. such as the stress of blind listening and some sort of outside expectations. pressure to measure up to other's perceptions. or be 'right'.
with all due respect, to begin with, i don't regard blind/double-blind testing as useful for hifi. not to say that in product development it can't work in some form or fashion for a designer under very rigorous conditions. but audiophile listening and the science of testing are separate animals.
our actual method of listening as far as eyes open or closed or any personal preference like that is a separate subject from blind testing. my opinion is that we all find our own methods that seem to work best over time that hold up under long term listening. we can be tempted to just believe first impressions and then proceed. it's most important to revisit conclusions over time for confirmation. especially how the music effects us and how we are immersed. hard to get that with quick hits in blind testing.
i do think over time we learn to listen better, to realize what is important to us in the music and the nuances and tells we pick up on. this past week a WBF member visited me and spent two days listening. he had heard the Grateful Dead/Jerry Garcia 300 times in person, over 30 years, and did lots of taping. we played lots of streaming files he had been present at and he had his own set of things he clued in on. it was his truth. that is very personal. i really could not relate to where he was coming from. my reference for his music was not very relevant. he did have to adjust some of those experiences to not being medicated. he said something about 'Bear' providing the best quality meds.
Last edited:
Something not really touched on, but when comparing, you have be in the right stare of mind. I don't know, you would get the same results coming in from a stressful day at work, turning on the stereo, and starting to swap cables around. As you would, if you were relaxed, had been enjoying music for a while, then decided to make some changes.
...there are days when I just shut it down. Nothing wrong with the system. It's my attitude. I can tell it's not a fit. Better to take in a little Netflix, etc. Stress. Health. Sun-spots. Who knows.
That's why you need time to do it properly to acquire a stable understanding across your varying moods and states. There is the need to live with both products across days to understand their sonics and ergonomics.
When I do a formal product review I will take 2-4 weeks to research the product -- knowledge, book-learning. I try to learn everything I can from the manufacturer, understand how it works, what is special about its features, options etc. During that time I use the product to get it burned-in, only listening to it at intervals to gauge the burn-in progress.
Then I will take somewhere between 4-6 weeks using it in my system at 1 - 4 hrs a day. I take notes during each listening session. I re-listen to recordings to compare my notes from, say, a couple weeks ago. Typically, the compared-to product is something I already have and know well. I will spend at least two weeks doing listening comparisons, again taking notes as I go. Then I write.
Last edited:
I have done quite a few A|B tests. That said, I continue to find that there is an intangible component to listening and evaluating. Often I find that the more impressive kit is not the option that I find most enjoyable over time. I recently auditioned a pre- and power- amp setup from one of the top-top manufacturers. After listening for a few days I referred to it as the best I have ever heard on paper. But in experience I wanted more. Admittedly, with experience I find myself drawn to warmer and more fluid sounding kit (aka tubes). All this despite the noise floor, non black backgrounds and so on.
Or, maybe I am just getting old...
the real test is as you don't want to stop listening. and then the next day you find any way to listen again. and this goes on for awhile. and you want to hear all your references again, and so on. and you don't get tired of it. and it's just fits. but also it reveals the inner musical message. it's not just listenable. it's special.
OTOH if you are struggling to get past the tonal balance, and so you want to retreat into something prettier that just has a smooth color, you won't know if it satisfies until you live with it for an extended time. the tube sameness might get old. but could be just right too. one man's sameness is another man's perfection.
personally you know how that went for me. i found low noise, non-feedback, low parts count solid state that reminded me of my tube reference sound. it's not the last word in certain ways, but it get's out of the way and there is no sameness signature. so far for two decades it keeps me happy. still tempted with wanderlust but seem to resist.
we want to find our own personal muse.
Last edited:
Some of tha FM gear for sale on Audiomarkt right now !
I just read on the net the FMA 111 s were selling for 17 K euros new back in 2016 .
If audio reviewers weren t so deaf , they could have pointed them out to me / get me interested back when they were relatively cheap .
Thye ve only gone up in price
Are you an Audio Crow taken to shiny objects?
Shiny golden objects have dominated humanities desire for thousands of years .
Ancient egypt / jewelry (FM acoustics , Golden audio cable connectors .)
Give The Customer What They Want: A Top Marketing Tip
My tube preamp/amp combo has a low noise floor and calm background. I didn't realize just how good it was in that respect until my latest system improvements.
Admittedly, since my PranaFidelity Dhyana speakers are relatively easy to drive, I don't need a complicated power amp with a multitude of tubes. My Octave RE 320 has just four power tubes, two per channel (the simplest possible configuration for push-pull), and three driver tubes. The preamp has three tubes in the regular pathway (tone control inactive).
I honestly think that the majority of audiophiles first look at the cables with which the component is connected .
With expensive brands and a lot of carbon , gold and expensive machining , they think uhhhmmm this guy/company is serious about SQ
With expensive brands and a lot of carbon , gold and expensive machining , they think uhhhmmm this guy/company is serious about SQ
There is no denying he is serious about trying to get good SQ. Whether he is succeeding or not and has the right approach is a different question.
Really, I hate gold hi-fi equipment. It's just as bad as chrome trim on modern cars. I know, I'm swimming against the current again.
the only place where gold likes is in my bank safe deposit box
I think to be successful in the high end audio bizz / sales you need to apeal to the bling bling factor .
Cables are like crypto ..... a joke , but people still pay a lot for them, people will pay for luxury items/ dreams , i m not sure think they really think it sounds better
I am referring to private indivduals who want SQ, not those in the business. Those in the business should be allowed to do what marketing it requires. It is the private individuals who do not do their own research but fall for gimmicks that is the problem in this hobby. If not for them, we would have more people making good sounding components at lower prices.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |