acoustic zen or chord indigo?

That's not how blind testing works. You don't simply ask people "can you hear a difference or not?"

To keep it simple, imagine you have two items, an A and a B. You put A in place, allow people to assess it, and then put B in place, and allow people to assess it. You then repeatedly swap A and B around, asking people to mark on their card whether, in each case, the item is an A or a B. Anyone who consistently identifies A as an A or B as a B, to a greater extent than would be the case with random guesswork, can be said to distinguish A and B blind, regardless of whether they are a believer or a non-believer.

Also, blind testing has nothing to do with wearing blindfolds, another common misconception...

-- Ian

 

So there will be no firing squad either ????.

Now I am sad.

 

no - but you could expect some fistycuffs...

 

Not a statistician myself but you would need a large enough group of people or enough occurances of the test to be able to eliminate the effect of guesswork

 

that might be tricky in Robs living room.

 

Let's face it this test thing isn't going to happen is it?

Too many ego's which could be bruised of it was done properly

Also I don't think it would end the debate as it must have been done before and the debate still continues......

I think "pistols at dawn" might be a better way to settle this

(or in some cases " handbags at dawn" :JPS:

The above statement is not directed at anyone person, real or imagined, is not intended to cause offence and should be taken as entirely fictional and not having any basis in reality.

Actually there's quite a lot that goes on here without any basis in reality eh?

 

Statisitically the results will be totally insignificant - unless we go on for days or weeks.

The test will however prove whether you can hear the huge improvements under controlled conditions. I found the experience very useful.

 

Perhaps not.

Consider the scenario where a tester correctly and consistently identifies cable A as A and B as B over 100% of the time and another tester has a 50-50% spread. It would suggest that the first tester has better hearing or listens to different attributes than the second tester. No? The number of switching between A & B should be large, not necessarily the number of testers because it may be that most people do not listen as critically.

The other scenarion could be that both testers come up with a near 50-50 result in which case there is nothing much between the cables being compared.

 

So it has to be a 'huge' difference, does it?

 

Listen, personally I really am not that bothered whatever the results of the test.

If I hear a difference it will confirm the improvements I (believed ) I heard with Signature over the previous cable.

If theres no difference, I'll happily sell it (without loss) and save a lot of time and money in the future not messing about with cables.

There's little ego. Either result is fine.

 

Best attitude to have IMO.

 

I firmly believe that cables can fine tune a system. I don't remember anyone saying that 'better' cables produce a 'huge improvement'. Often, virtues that one person hears as an improvement would be seen differently by another. We are talking about small differences in presentation that some people are able to process and others are not. For example, I am very conscious of vocal sibilance and any cable/equipment that does not control this would not be in my system for very long.

 

Mmmm and anyone who doesn't want to notice gives the same assessment for A or B. My point still stands(unfortunately).

 

No it doesn't. If you test 1,000 people and only one of them scores better than random, that means the difference is proven.

 

If even a single tester can notice the difference and identify the cables when tested blind surely that proves the differences exist, even if some cannot hear or are in denial. Otherwise there are really no noticeable differences.

Edit: Markus beat me to it.

 

Clearly the test won't be perfect and may not even succeed in putting the matter to rest.

From my own perspective, I find that when I sit down with other 'audiophiles' to specifically listen to gear, I invariably do not feel relaxed, often quite the opposite.

So could come to a slightly different conclusion compared to being solo- IMHO. Plus the added pressure.

But what I'd suggest is that instead of doing this just the once, lets have a series of tests at various folks' places.

I'm 10 minutes drive from Robs. My clean 15" Tannoy DMTs will provide an open window. The largely concrete basement is a bit on the live side with no treatment- but that could be a plus for noticing any 'differences'.

And then on to someone else....another time.

 

Doh!

 

Yes please.

 

To keep some measure of organisation, would be best if a 'group' was formed beforehand. Say, 3 believers and 3 nons all living within reachable distances. That would be six tests (or 12 if done twice)

Lets see how we all feel after that.

 

yeah but what if you had converts along the way - wouldn't keep the balance