We can both agree that knowing what certain gear costs, or how it looks impacts how the sound of such equipment is perceived.
No, we apparently can’t even agree on that. That knowledge may and often will impact our perception but not necessarily always and not necessarily for everyone.
Whether you define this as being a part of "psychoacoustics" or not isn't important to me.
Your OP was all about the perception of sound and there is a branch of science that deals specifically/exclusively with that topic, “psychoacoustics”. You stated that “
I am a former subjectivist”, that “
I really want the sound science users take on it” and elsewhere that “
I decided to stop rationalizing and accept a more scientific approach” but in the above quote you’re saying that the definition of psychoacoustics, which defines “our take on it” and the “scientific approach”, “
isn’t important to me [you]”. So which is it?
The point I made, however, still stands: Our perception of music is impacted by more than just the physical qualities of the sound interacting with our ears etc.
That wasn’t the point you made, or at least not the main point. Your main point was a fallacy, a false equivalence, namely that because you saw a TV show which appeared to demonstrate that the senses of taste and smell were relatively useless without sight, that the perception of sound/music was also largely dependent on sight and therefore, a blind test will limit our ability to perceive music/differences. There are numerous reasons, some of them obvious, why your assumption is false.
Firstly, a blind test does not mean you are literally blind, a blind test refers to knowledge rather than sight.
Secondly, when listening to an audio recording of music we are “blind” anyway! Regardless of whether you’re doing a “blind test” or just casual sighted listening, you cannot see the orchestra/band/musicians you’re listening to.
Thirdly, when you close your eyes and listen, can you no longer tell the difference between Mozart and Motorhead, can you no longer pick out the violins, electric guitar or other instruments? Our perception/hearing can obviously still function well, even when we can’t see what we’re listening to, if it couldn’t there would be no reason or demand for audio only music recordings. We can’t see, smell, taste or touch music, what other senses are we reliant on to interpret sound and what reliable evidence do you have for such an assertion?
Lastly, our perception of music is impacted by a great deal more than just the sound entering our ears, in fact there would be no perception of music if that were not the case, that is why we have “blind testing” in the first place.
I know that you are logically capable and intellectually honest enough to know that this is just a complete non argument. By that same logic, Einstein was showing a truly elite level of Dunning-Kruger effect when he challenged our previous understanding of time and gravity. Yes, I just compared my incoherent ramblings about a topic I don't understand to Einstein.
How can you judge that I am “
logically capable and intellectually honest”, when you are not? Because the actual logic is pretty much the opposite to what you claim is “
that same logic”. If Einstein had made “
incoherent ramblings about a topic he didn’t understand”, AND if he were contradicting very reliable demonstrated evidence, AND if he did all that purely on the basis of assumptions/fallacies, AND without any reliable evidence, then that would be “
that same logic” and indeed he too would have been a victim of the Dunning-Kruger effect! As Einstein did none of these things, so how is his theory of relativity an example of “
that same logic” and not instead an example of a “false analogy”?
Yes. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
And there’s your problem, or at least one of them. If you don’t know how a blind test is conducted or even what it is, how can you know what it does or doesn’t account for/mitigate and therefore what questions others have asked (and answered)? An obvious example is you claiming hearing shouldn’t be isolated from sight, when blind testing protocol does not require test subjects be deprived of sight and ignores the fact that we can’t see the music/music performance we’re listening to under any conditions, blind or sighted (when listening to an audio recording) anyway.
G