I'd like to add that blind-testing does not dictate any of the things which are typically used as argument against it. The main thing which is required is that it is truly blind. The
practicalities of conducting a blind-test however typically dictates a certain protocol, and this could prevent subjects from performing like they would in the comfort of their home.
It would be extremely expensive to eliminate all unnaturalness of a blind-test, which is likely why it has never been done. For amplifiers, for example, you'd have to build a box around the amplifiers which looked identical. If amplifier A and B weighed differently or produced different amounts of heat, that would have to be compensated by adding weights and heater elements etc. The volume knobs would have to be operated indirectly taking different gains into consideration. You get the picture.
But it would indeed be possible to eliminate all the things which are commonly put against audio blind-testing thus letting the subjects listen to the gear in the comfort of their home for as long as they liked.
I'm just saying this because it sometimes appears that people think that blind testing
in itself dictates that you have to listen under certain awkward circumstances, while in reality this is dictated by the practicalities of making sure the test is truly (double) blind. Eliminating these factors would be extremely expensive but it's possible.
For cables it would be a lot easier to construct a test which enables the subjects to listen the way they prefer for as long as they like thereby eliminating all possible objections against the test procedure... maybe this has already been done.
I'm open to the possibility that there
could be factors which makes a difference between gear that otherwise measure identically on parameters that current scientific understanding finds important, but I must admit to finding it highly unlikely (in the same category as UFOs). I find the alternative placebo explanation much, much more likely and I am a little puzzled as to why this explanation is in such bad standing. Placebo is good for you! It happens all the time, for all of us. Why is this explanation not accepted? I don't get it.
If nothing else, the continued lack of success in blind-testing puts things in perspective when you read stuff like: "night and day difference", "it was immediately apparent", "amp A walks all over amp B" and so on and so forth. I mean, if this mega-difference disappears just because you're not at home, or just because there's another person in the room, or just because you can only listen for 5 minutes, or just because you don't sit in your own chair...
Very interesting thread, but please be civil OK
