Good example of a double blind test: testing "audiophile" equipment

[Project86]

www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm

I've seen plenty of similar tests, but I felt this one was particularly well done and well documented. It's also cool that in their cheap system, the price ratio between the speakers and the rest of the equipment is almost exactly the same as what I have (but on a slightly smaller scale).

[Mercutio]

Very nice! Thanks for this--I may steal it for classes...

[Ladewig]

www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm

I've seen plenty of similar tests, but I felt this one was particularly well done and well documented. It's also cool that in their cheap system, the price ratio between the speakers and the rest of the equipment is almost exactly the same as what I have (but on a slightly smaller scale).

On the whole it was well done, but it wasn't a fully blinded experiment because the people switching the cables knew which was which and the listeners could observe the HABXers. Ideally, the listeners should not be able to watch someone who knows which is which. Still I give the experiment high marks.

[blutoski]

www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm

I've seen plenty of similar tests, but I felt this one was particularly well done and well documented. It's also cool that in their cheap system, the price ratio between the speakers and the rest of the equipment is almost exactly the same as what I have (but on a slightly smaller scale).

One problem with this type of test - and I've fallen into this trap myself - is that there often really *is* a difference between the systems in question. Expensive gadgets may really distort the sound.

The problem is that the person who invests in the gadget is also invested in the belief that this sound change is an 'improvement'. From this we get the crwod who swear that LPs produce 'better' sound than CDs. Is there a difference? Yes. Is it an improvement? Pure opinion.

[Project86]

One problem with this type of test - and I've fallen into this trap myself - is that there often really *is* a difference between the systems in question. Expensive gadgets may really distort the sound.

The problem is that the person who invests in the gadget is also invested in the belief that this sound change is an 'improvement'. From this we get the crwod who swear that LPs produce 'better' sound than CDs. Is there a difference? Yes. Is it an improvement? Pure opinion.


That's why I like the way this was done: rather than the usual "which system was which" type of questions, they simply asked "which do you like better?" Among this particular group, more people chose the cheaper system.

I'll freely admit to being influenced by price, aesthetics, and industry hype myself. I once had some rather expensive esoteric type tower speakers, and a friend brought over some bookshelf speakers from an internet-direct company (that cost roughly 1/3 as much). They didn't look nearly as impressive, and I refused to admit that they sounded better. He left them with me for a week, and by the end of the week I reluctantly changed my mind, after much more listening.