The Merits of 'DBT'

[Rich]

Exactly Rich, I totally concur ! and it's the Audio press that are some of the worst offenders which in turn has transcended into all the various forums.....this one included.

Correct, Dave. The audio press likes DBT about as much as a politician likes a fact-based interview. And it is no surprise that they should be the most vocally vehement against the utility of this sort of testing. Their careers depend on their ability to wax poetic about all the minute differences they can clearly hear between components. If it was proven time and again that they couldn't pick out one component from another under DBT, then suddenly the emperor has no clothes.

 

[timm]

couple of comments: Ever notice that when you really want to hear the music and focus on something - you close your eyes? Or - why does your system sound better in the dark? Its because your sense of sight is eliminated from the equation and I think your brain has less to interrupt its focus. So, how could one argue that blind testing is a bad thing?

Secondly, you have the issue of prejudice and personal preference. If something costs 10K - don't you really expect it to sound better than your 200 dollar item?....like by a lot?

All I'm saying is - yes, mistakes are made...you might think you hear a diff when in fact there was none.... But, given all of the variables - wouldn't it make sense to reduce those variables (personal preferences/prejudices)?

I too have A/B'd something and heard something in one - then heard it in the other. Maybe because the presentation was a little different - as an example - mayble that horn stood out on one cd player - and on the other it was in the background - a more laid back presentation - so I didn't notice it. Or, maybe I was just focusing on a different piece of the presentation and didn't realize it. It was there the first time but just didn't come to my attention.

In any case, the method is only as good as the listener - but if the listener is fed prompts (i.e. 'now we'll put on the mega-system - tell me if it sounds better') or in Gordon's case above ('tell me which one you like better' - when there was no change) that to me adds a level of prejudice.... In the first you are expecting one to sound better, in Gordon's case - he was expecting to hear a difference. There should be no expectation - and that is hard for us humans to do....

 

[tsv_1]

Or, maybe I was just focusing on a different piece of the presentation and didn't realize it. It was there the first time but just didn't come to my attention.

I think you just nailed a big part of it. When the mind/brain chooses to focus on something, most all other "input" gets discarded... in a blind test meant to evaluate audio, depending on your thoughts at the time, you could easily hear two different properties of the same music even when listening to the exact same equipment twice consecutively. This is not to say there aren't real differences between two different components being compared... but it does suggest that the listener's instantaneous target of attention will impact the test results.

Now, the attention span of your typical audiophi........ hey, there goes a squirrel!

 

[amey01]

I believe that many of the differences people swear they hear between components disappear under DBT.

So so true. The flipside however, is that those differences that disappear can (quite legitimately I think) come back when you spend some time with a component in your system - when you start using that component to convey emotion rather than just sound.

 

[twich54]

when you spend some time with a component in your system - when you start using that component to convey emotion rather than just sound.

Translation.......'mind over matter'.....psychoacoustics.....and there's nothing wrong with that so long as it puts a smile on your face ! ......:music:

 

[Gordon Gray]

Are you guys actually saying you would purchase a component based on a "legitimate" (whatever the hell that is) DBT versus an extended audition (two to four weeks) in your system?

Sure sounds like it to me.

If an extended audition is considered psycho acoustics, please reserve my seat in the psycho ward.

GG

 

[timm]

Gordon that seemed like quite a leap. I don't think anyone was saying that. My point was that by eliminating variables you should be able to come to a more accurate conclusion. How about a 2-4 week blind test listening session? Again I fail to see how that would not lead to more accurate results from an audio only perspective. If sound is what it is about then why not remove the visual and focus on the sound?

 

[Gordon Gray]

timm,

First off, I always listen to music, when I'm serious about the experience, by candle light.

To the other issue, no one has yet to articulate what a "legitimate" DBT is and furthermore, how much credence should be given to that experience when deciding whether or not to buy a component based on a DBT experience.

Still waiting for some reasonable discussion on that issue.

Gordon

 

[Rich]

Are you guys actually saying you would purchase a component based on a "legitimate" (whatever the hell that is) DBT versus an extended audition (two to four weeks) in your system?

Are you actually saying that you would purchase a component based solely on hearing it in your system for a few weeks versus comparing it directly to the competition in tests designed to remove extraneous variables that might color your perception of its abilities?

The simple fact is that it doesn't have to be an either/or proposition. There are advantages to both. You can learn a lot about a component listening to it for a few weeks in your system. But you may not be able to really remember how it's performance differs from the next component you have in your system for a couple of weeks, other than vague subjective ideas. And your ideas of how it sounds may very well be colored by the brand name, the price tag, the pretty glow of its tubes, and any number of other factors. When you do some form of DBT, the rubber meets the road as to whether this preamp really has more silky highs, more luscious midrange, or tighter bass than that other. Does it really? If so, then you should be able to tell them apart in DBT. Shouldn't you?

 

[twich54]

no one has yet to articulate what a "legitimate" DBT is

but one snipit.............


http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295

Still waiting for some reasonable discussion on that issue.

Actually I think Rich has done a very good job in so far as 'reasonable discussion' ,with that being said I'd like to hear from those who are 'constructively' against it and to what areas are at fault.

I can understand the importance of the human variable......having good young ears capable of discerning in an objective manner.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Rich,

I agree that one should be able to tell sonic differences between components.

The question for me is and always will be:

Does that particular component allow me to better connect emotionally with the music?

I am obviously having a hard time understanding how DBT assists me in making my best, well informed decision using that criteria.

Maybe what you all are saying is that DBT allows one to react to music on an objective level (silky highs versus an overly aggressive top end) and long term listening is meant to address the subjective / emotional side of the equation.

If that's the case, I certainly can see some value in using ABX or DBT.

Gordon

 

[robertawillisjr]

+1

As far as brand cache and expense goes, we humans do it all of the time. The world of fashion is an extreme example. But the selection of cameras, cars, tote bags, everything is most often determined by our human foibles (or lack thereof). From a sociological view this may or may not be bad.

Say we do a blind test of McIntosh versus Van Alstine (which has a fine reputation) equipment and can't determine any difference. I think many people would select the McIntosh equipment (if they could afford it) due to eye appeal. There is nothing wrong with that.

Part of what I am getting here is a dislike for snobbery which should always be distinct from "taste" and/or "preference"

 

[tsv_1]

+1

As far as brand cache and expense goes, we humans do it all of the time. The world of fashion is an extreme example. But the selection of cameras, cars, tote bags, everything is most often determined by our human foibles (or lack thereof). From a sociological view this may or may not be bad.

Say we do a blind test of McIntosh versus Van Alstine (which has a fine reputation) equipment and can't determine any difference. I think many people would select the McIntosh equipment (if they could afford it) due to eye appeal. There is nothing wrong with that.

Part of what I am getting here is a dislike for snobbery which should always be distinct from "taste" and/or "preference"

An astute observation. Aesthetics play a larger part than most people are willing to admit. Part of the joy of this hobby, IMO, is finding high performance components and building a system that is both hansom and phenomenal sounding. Purist audiophiles would scream heresy - let them. There's nothing wrong with anyone's choice (visually pleasing or not) if the end result is satisfying to them. Buying something to impress others though... not so appealing.

 

[Rich]

The question for me is and always will be:

Does that particular component allow me to better connect emotionally with the music?

I am obviously having a hard time understanding how DBT assists me in making my best, well informed decision using that criteria.

I understand where you're coming from. Let me see if I can help you. First of all, I don't think emotional connection with the music is truly your only criteria. I like to bring up the example of hearing the Vistas in a showroom connected to a Jolida tube amp & pre. The sound was absolutely luscious, beautiful, highly involving, and provided a real emotional connection with the music, even off-axis. It was also rolled off in the highs, mushy in the lows, and highly euphonic, with a lot of unnatural harmonics, in the mids. It was nothing near a realistic portrayal of the recording. But it sounded beautiful and provided a real emotional connection with the music. If that were my only criteria, I would have bought that combo in a heartbeat. But I could never live with that in my system. There are too many recordings that would sound awful with that combo. See where I am going with this?

On this forum, when we discuss components, we don't spend a lot of time talking about the emotional connection they provide. We talk about how they sound. The qualities of the sound presentation. The imaging. The soundstage. The quality of the highs, mids, and lows. The presentation of the instruments, the vocals, etc. It is difficult to compare all of these qualities of musical presentation between two components when you have one in your system for a few weeks and then another in your system for a few weeks. Without a direct comparison, you get used to the sound of one or the other and form subjective opinions of it. By using DBT, you can throw a little objectivity into the decision and compare them more directly on how they present the music.

Suppose you auditioned two preamps in your system and both of them provided you with an emotional connection to the music, but you felt they did so for different reasons. In other words, you liked both of them even though they seemed to present differently sonically. Wouldn't you think some DBT would allow you to more objectively measure the qualities of musical presentation that mattered to you in such a way that you could choose which one you liked better (and know the reason why you liked it better)?

Maybe what you all are saying is that DBT allows one to react to music on an objective level (silky highs versus an overly aggressive top end) and long term listening is meant to address the subjective / emotional side of the equation.

I think that is exactly what I am saying.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Got it my friend. Thanks for bearing with me.

 

[Angela]

I know this is a touchy subject, but lack of knowledge can lead to an audiophile parting with way too much money. May I offer this white-paper for digestion? put your feet up, it's long but I think well worth the read. If anyone is interested in borrowing the test box setup to see for yourself, just contact Roger.

http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/technical-white-papers/audio-equipment-testing-wp

Cheers,
Angela

Sanders Sound Systems

 

[David Matz]

Check out this thread for a pretty exhaustive set of arguments:


http://www.avguide.com/forums/blind-listening-tests-are-flawed-editorial

Personally, I don't believe that the audiophile industry is a scam

 

[Gordon Gray]

I know this is a touchy subject, but lack of knowledge can lead to an audiophile parting with way too much money. May I offer this white-paper for digestion? put your feet up, it's long but I think well worth the read. If anyone is interested in borrowing the test box setup to see for yourself, just contact Roger.

http://www.sanderssoundsystems.com/technical-white-papers/audio-equipment-testing-wp

Cheers,
Angela

Sanders Sound Systems

Hi Angela,

As previously stated, I admire Roger for his contribution / involvement in the hi-end industry.

However, I do feel it is inappropriate to use this forum to effectively provide a venue for marketing your product.

Recently bought a pair of MBL116's. I love the omni presentation and the total absence of the "head in a vice" perspective that Sanders speaker design principals espouse.

Listening to a live jazz or classical concert clearly supports this position.

Gordon

 

[twich54]

Hi Angela,

As previously stated, I admire Roger for his contribution / involvement in the hi-end industry.

However, I do feel it is inappropriate to use this forum to effectively provide a venue for marketing your product.

Oh come on Gordon.......jeeze louise.....no need to get your 'britches' in a bind !

 

[asindc]

Rather than start a new thread about this topic, I thought it better to revive this discussion about DBT. I just read an article that appeared in Hi-Fi+ Magazine awhile ago about a DBT with six different brands of IC/SC groupings at different price levels. The link to the article (which can also be found on Nordost's website) is here: http://www.nordost.com/pdf/hifiplus_issue34.pdf

I'll cut to the chase for those who rather not read the entire article, though I think it is definitely worth the read for those interested in the subject. This is how the cables ranked overall:

1) Nordost Valhalla (most expensive IC; 3rd most SC)
2) Chord Signature (4th; 5th)
3) Stereovox Symmetry (2nd; 1st)
4) Siltech SQ-110/LS-188 (3rd; 2nd)*
5) Audience Au24 (5th; 4th)
6) QED Q-nect 3/Silver Anniversary (6th; 6th)
*After adjustment. See article for more details.

The article breaks down the methodology/systems used/results with more detail than I care to copy here. Suffice it to say for now that at least one mainstream audio review publication (not including Audioholics in this assessment, though I think that website has a useful role to play in the audio/video review industry) has conducted a DBT test and has published those results. I am of the belief that whatever method you employ to choose a component for your system is fine, as long as you are satisfied with your choice, cables being no different than any other component in that regard (yes, I think of cables as components). I found the article useful to read, even if it is not a method I would employ to make a decision. Have at it...