the argument against dbt

[Antony6555]

Can anyone explain the argument against dbt to me? To me, it seems that the arguments against quantitative scientific arguments don't apply to it since it is basically a qualitative test-it only tests whether you can personally perceive a difference in your own equipment and doesn't use abstract measurements. Anyone want to help me here?

 

[Arjisme]

What are you going to do with that information (the results of the dbt)?

 

[PhilS]

There's a lot of posts discussing various arguments against (and for) DBT's. Did you do a search? Or is there some nuance to your question that you don't think is addressed by all the previous discussions?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but there sure are a lot of posts on this already, including quite a few in the past month.

 

[Berlioz]

Well, I support DBT, but I do have a few problems with it, having done a number of them so far.

Firstly, that during a DBT test it just doesn't feel at all like normal listening. There is a great sense of urgency, as if you need to pick apart every little thing, almost as if you'd be punished should you miss anything. It's not like normal listening where you are kind in the "zone".

Secondly, listening fatigue builds very quickly. Soon both versions start to sound exactly the same, even if you heard large differences a few trials earlier.

Thirdly, both systems need to be exactly the same, and some DBT opponents argue that this is not possible, and that there will always be audible differences between two components, even if they are the exact same model and age, etc.

There are more objections to DBT I think, but those three that I listed are certainly the ones that I hear about most often. Hope that clears things up a bit for you.

 

[wavoman]

I am in favor of blind testing (often single-blind will work as well as DBT), although I do think that it is often done poorly. I can summarize for you some of the arguments against it (although I do not agree):

1. The tests are often in unnatrual settings (public forums like hotel meeting rooms) that make listeners less comfortable than they are at home, and hence less able to listen critically and/or hear well.

2. The tests are often short, and it takes long-term listening to hear subtle differences.

3. The tests often use supporting equipment that is not of the first rank, and therefore unable to reproduce the subtle differences that are being tested for.

4. The tests often pool results across a large pool of listeners, obscuring the correct results turned in by a select few audiophiles.

5. The very nature of testing leads to "response bias", where people being tested give an answer different from what they really believe or sense (in order to please, or to foil, the tester, or to avoid personal embarrasement, etc.).

I believe there is an on-line essay from on of the editors at Stereophile laying out these arguments and more -- I'll find it an post it unless someone beats me to it.

The entire drug discovery industry, and the food industry, rely on blind testing, so it is hard to take the above as death blows -- rather to me they suggest ways to improve blind testing of audio gear.

 

[wavoman]

Ah, I see several of us posted at the same time, saying pretty much the same thing.

I found the article I was thinking about, from The Absolute Sound, not Stereophile:

Blind Listening Tests are Flawed: An Editorial | AVguide

See also, from some older stuff from Sterophile:

Stereophile: The Highs & Lows of Double-Blind Testing

 

[Uncle Erik]

I think the biggest problem with DBT is that believers cannot accept that they don't hear a difference.

Thinking about this, it'd probably be best to run tests designed to demonstrate that human hearing is unreliable. The way I'd do it would be to allow a believer to choose, say, five cables for evaluation. The believer could spend whatever time they want listening to them - sighted - while taking extensive notes on the sound of each. They could choose whatever associafed equipment they want.

The second phase would add five other cables to the mix. I'd include coathangers, cables soaked in saltwater for a month, stuff like that. Allow the believer to listen to these - again, sighted - as long as he wants and to make extensive notes.

Then, I'd have 20 blind listening sessions with the ten cables, at random. Each cable will be played once, though some may get three plays. Again, allow unlimited listening time. The believer would again take extensive notes on the sound of each.

After, compare the written notes of each cable between sighted and blind listening.

I'd wager that the differences in impressions would be wildly inconsistent.

This is the only way to settle this debate. If you look at the scientific tests - with instruments and DBT - the evidence against cables is damning. However, no matter how carefully done, believers refuse to accept the results.

The only way to settle this debate is to prove that believers' ears aren't as good as they think they are.

 

[BIG POPPA]

In my journey in enjoying music there is nothing a DBT can show me more than all the listening to music I do normally does already. If I wanted to listen to a specific piece of gear Then I would go to a meet or go to the local Hi-Fi shop. To me this is still a hobby and the DBT should be left to the manufacturers in the R and D of new gear. To me there is really no value to the consumer to DBT gear. If you buy something and you don't like it, you can usually return it. Waste the time of the guy at the Hi-Fi shop trying to DBT before you buy it? To me it is too much chinga for a hobby. Just like to listen to music too much to worry about the small stuff.

 

[Speederlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berlioz /img/forum/go_quote.gif Secondly, listening fatigue builds very quickly. Soon both versions start to sound exactly the same, even if you heard large differences a few trials earlier.

Or maybe instead of fatigue the earlier self-imposed coloring of the sound due to expectations of the listener has started to fade.

 

[Speederlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you buy something and you don't like it, you can usually return it. Waste the time of the guy at the Hi-Fi shop trying to DBT before you buy it?

1. What if it's something without a long return time?
2. What if, like many, there isn't a hi-fi shop close that has the stuff you want to try w/o special ordering it?

Most people don't have unlimited access to money or a place to experiment. So they depend very much on the opinions of people who bought the gear, but those opinions and their accuracy as they relate to other listeners is at issue, especially on very expensive cables/power cords.

 

[Zanth]

I think Uncle Erik's suggestion is about the only way a DBT can successfully work. I've suggested something very similar in the past and to me it makes sense. Take away the listener's anxiety and allow them to get acquainted with the cables in their own system and then have them predict which cable they think they are listening to at such time as they feel certain.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speederlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1. What if it's something without a long return time? 2. What if, like many, there isn't a hi-fi shop close that has the stuff you want to try w/o special ordering it? Most people don't have unlimited access to money or a place to experiment. So they depend very much on the opinions of people who bought the gear, but those opinions and their accuracy as they relate to other listeners is at issue, especially on very expensive cables/power cords.

If you are put in that position, sometimes you just have to roll the dice. Not before all the homework you have done beforehand. By then you should know what to expect for the most part.

Power cords are easy for the most part with a little homework. There is not too much VOO DOO with the most recognizable companies like Cardas, Kimber Kable, Acrolink, Oyaide, and Furutech.

 

[PhilS]

It's interesting that every time a general or theoretical question about DBT's is asked, many (or most) of the arguments involve cables. It seems like cables are a favorite whipping boy. I wonder if some people would make the same arguments if we were talking about amps or DAC's.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speederlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1. What if it's something without a long return time? 2. What if, like many, there isn't a hi-fi shop close that has the stuff you want to try w/o special ordering it? Most people don't have unlimited access to money or a place to experiment. So they depend very much on the opinions of people who bought the gear, but those opinions and their accuracy as they relate to other listeners is at issue, especially on very expensive cables/power cords.

With respect to cables (the favorite whipping boy), you can buy many, many cables with a 30- to 60-day return. Similar return periods are available for other components as well. And you probably don't need to worry about buying "very expensive" cables or power cords (or other equipment) if you try some mid-priced cords (or other equipment) and decide you can't hear a difference. Trying it for yourself (you can even do your blind tests if you want) really does not require "unlimited access to money" or a "place to experiment" (other than your apartment or home).

 

[BIG POPPA]

The Mystery is lifted after you make a few with some exotic parts here and there. All my power cables and RCA's are DIY. I still want to buy some RCA's from Chord to see how they match with my Arcam though.