Re: setting up ABX tests at home

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:26:31 -0800, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article <fotrhn02kb0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):

> Greg Wormald <greg.wormald@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Steve wrote:
>>> I want to set up an ABX test at home on different sources to see if I
>>> can hear a difference. I am doing this for my own education and fun -
>>> I don't want to start investing in SPL meters, switches gain
>>> equalizers of other boxes.
> 
>> Steve,
> 
>> As long as you are doing it for fun, the set-ups you have specified 
>> should work. Education is a different matter.
> 
>> While ABX tests have their proponents, they also have detractors, and 
>> such tests may not educate you about equipment at all. What both 
>> proponents and detractors agree upon is that for short term tests 
>> absolute sound level matching is a must. Many tests have shown that the

>> louder source is usually preferred.
> 
>> The very set-up of much ABX testing (which is most often short segments

>> of music quickly switched), cannot test for what most music lovers are 
>> seeking--long term enjoyment of music listening. A goodly number of 
>> years ago I ABX blind tested some interconnects, and then chose the
ones 
>> I preferred. Three months later I realised I was not listening as much 
>> or enjoying it at the level I was previously. I found myself turning
the 
>> music down or off. When I went back to my old interconnects my
listening 
>> increased to it's previous levels of enjoyment.
> 
> ..at which point , if you did an ABX, you would be able to tell 
> the two apart , right?  
> 
> This is what alwyas perplexes me about the 'you need to do 
> long term listening' brigade.  If you believe long term'listening is
> required to get the true 'sound' of the gear into your brains,
> fine, go for it.  And *then* demonstrate you're hearing a real
difference,
> using a ABX comparison.  Shoudl be simple to 'pass' at that point,
> shouldn't it?

Not always. Sometimes differences are subtle and many times, certain 
recordings simply aren't good enough to allow those differences to show
up. 
For instance, suppose we are testing the soundstage/imaging of two
different 
sets of speakers and we use a 20-track recording that places a microphone
in 
front of each instrument in the ensemble. An ABX or double-blind test will

tell you nothing of the imaging characteristics of those speakers because,

there isn't any imaging in the recording - merely a bunch of instruments 
pan-potted to the right, the left, and the center.