Lawire, have your blind testing techniques led to any conclusions/generalisations concerning the cost/quality ratio of audio equipment. I'm interested as this also seems to be a sore point with those in favour of blind testing. However i notice that the equipment that you employ, and indeed report testing, is not exactly of the budget variety. Hence have any trends emerged here? You obviously think a Krell or whatever is worth paying more for than a Marantz, despite the fact that a £3000 product say, is not 10x better than a £300 product (or is it sometimes?), althought this direct relationship between cost and quality that some people desire is a bit ridiculous. Do you ever blind test cheap gear i.e sub £1000 and run it head to head with the pricier stuff - what have you discovered? Its just that many seem in favour of blind testing only in order that they can dispel the myth that more expensive products are in any way better, just that the extra cost is a consequence of build, looks, kudos etc, and don't seem necessarily interested in just purchasing the best product, whatever the cost via the vehicle of DBT rigour. ***i.e. i suspect many of the DBT advocates would still be squirming at your expenditure on audio, despite employing the very method they are proposing.***

You have to confess though that when you listen in ordinary circumstances, you are not blindfolded (are you?!)!

 

Fair play

cheers