I honestly think the entire ABX scene is a total joke. You can't listen to a system, wait 5 min, listen to another, and then tell which one sounded better
Generally here (this subforum) the gold standard is different not better, better being far too subjective, but agreed, for anything that is not momentually huge a gap of 5 minutes is far too much and by that token I got my "modded" CD player back after 3 weeks and it is a night and day improvement is beyond laughable.
unless you KNOW the equipment by heart.
oh, now you spoil it by falling back on audiophile dogma
I have amplifiers that at home I can tell apart.
You can verify this how ?
Barely though, and only because I have listened to them so much I know their exact signature.
Oddly Masters and Clarks' listeners felt just the same but still could not do it, nor the Bryston owner who thought he was listening to a cheap Onkyo
If you wan't to quantify any difference in a short ABX test then you have to be flipping a switch instantly changing amplifiers with volumes set equally.
Agreed, but doable and there are boxes which exist for you to do this.
You have to have transparent speakers and a source that are both more than capable of revealing all that both amp's have to offer.
More audiophile dogma and largely unverified except anecdotally, I would settle for low distortion but any decent CDP does that.
You have to have seasoned listeners who's ears and minds can detect the subtle differences.
What like the seasoned listeners who failed........[insert case here]
The closed phones are WAY boomier bass-wise, the treble is grainy, and the mids sound plasticy. So I really don't trust any of these blind tests with random people.
Many if not most published DBTs do use specialist listeners such as engineers, music students, audiophiles, reviewers and so on..PRM has a partial list , Sean Olive has a blog with links to the results of many expert-populated DBTs
Also, changing amplifiers should be instantaneous and not with a 5+ min difference, not with any time difference. After the music is paused we forget how it sounded
Absolutely, no argument from me here, that is why I either use ABX software or switch boxes or multiple inputs for my tests
unless it has been imprinted in our minds over months and months.
No, all you have is a general pattern-matching thing, like recognising your mum's voice on the phone not whether the cello is a touch recessed with amp B, Tom Nousaine tested this, he issued a box with either 2.5% distortion or none and the long term listeners tests were 50% correct detection, with an ABX box detection was much better. This was 2.5% distortion not some tiny tiny subtle difference !
So in my opinion all of these tests are bull. But they do show that there isn't THAT much difference past a certain price point when comparing amps of similar power.
and competent construction
If they expected these tests to reflect anything, they would not be asking "which amp sounds better". They would be asking specific questions that would allow popular consensus to determine an amps qualities - proving audible differences. Asking about soundstage, clarity, bass, mid, and treble quality.
I am not convinced that would really be useful as the terms used are generally too woolly - also the number of times I read a "this cd player has more treble extension than that cd player" review and when you compare the FR they are both razor flat makes me skeptical of how well people can in general distinguish reality from fantasy and your screechy treble on harpsichord may be my period-appropriate rendering and so on.
Until this happens then the only thing I will ever trust are my own ears.
Well sadly it is not just your ears , it is your ears and a whole host of cognitive biases we are as humans prone to, even knowing they exist does not help, DBT at least removes foreknowledge/expectation
