战玄学，非盲听中的欺骗

jjx01 · 发表于 2013-10-11 17:28

原文：http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/04/dishonesty-of-sighted-audio-product.html这是1994年的实验。

……

A total of 40 Harman employees participated in these tests, giving preference ratings to four loudspeakers that covered a wide range of size and price. The test was conducted under both sighted and blind conditions using four different music selections.

The mean loudspeaker ratings and 95% confidence intervals are plotted inFigure 1 for both sighted and blind tests. The sighted tests produced a significant increase in preference ratings for the larger, more expensive loudspeakers G and D. (note: G and D were identical loudspeakers except with different cross-overs, voiced ostensibly for differences in German and Northern European tastes, respectively. The negligible perceptual differences between loudspeakers G and D found in this test resulted in the creation of a single loudspeaker SKU for all of Europe, and the demise of an engineer who specialized in the lost art of German speaker voicing).

Brand biases and employee loyalty to Harman products were also a factor in the sighted tests, since three of the four products (G,D, and S) were Harman branded. Loudspeaker T was a large, expensive ($3.6k) competitor's speaker that had received critical acclaim in the audiophile press for its sound quality. However, not even Harman brand loyalty could overpower listeners' prejudices associated with the relatively small size, low price, and plastic materials of loudspeaker S; in the sighted test, it was less preferred to Loudspeaker T, in contrast to the blind test where it was slightly preferred over loudspeaker T.

非盲听时很多人认为音箱G和D更好（G和D的区别是做出了不同的cross-overs为了体现所谓的德国味和北欧味，结果没人听出它们的差别），品牌忠诚也影响了非盲听时的结果，GD完胜对手牌子的3.6k箱子T，但是低端箱S则不受品牌影响，被认为不如T箱。盲听时对4个箱子的感觉则完全不同，基本处在同一水准。

Loudspeaker positional effects were also a factor since these tests were conducted prior to the construction of the Multichannel Listening Lab with its automated speaker shuffler. The positional effects on loudspeaker preference rating are plotted in Figure 2 for both blind and sighted tests. The positional effects on preference are clearly visible in the blind tests, yet, the effects are almost completely absent in the sighted tests where the visual biases and cognitive factors dominated listeners' judgment of the auditory stimuli. Listeners were also less responsive to loudspeaker-program effects in the sighted tests as compared to the blind test conditions. Finally, the tests found that experienced and inexperienced listeners (both male and female) tended to prefer the same loudspeakers, which has been confirmed in a more recent, larger study. The experienced listeners were simply more consistent in their responses. As it turned out, the experienced listeners were no more or no less immune to the effects of visual biases than inexperienced listeners.

摆位影响则相反，盲听时两个位置的听感显然有差别，而非盲听时听感差别消失。

……

“Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me..”

酷风 · 发表于 2013-10-11 21:52

早就说过了，组织者有心的话，想让人听不出来差别很容易，想让人听出来差别不容易

jjx01 · 发表于 2013-10-11 22:18

本帖最后由 jjx01 于 2013-10-11 23:33 编辑

试验1属于非盲听听出差别的，试验2属于非盲听听不出差别的。

酷风 · 发表于 2013-10-19 22:09

jjx01 发表于 2013-10-11 22:18 * Y; ~" b* E3 N* K
试验1属于非盲听听出差别的，试验2属于非盲听听不出差别的。

真正的盲听应该是让参与者处于最好的状态
也就是说：其余器材都用参与者最熟悉的，音乐也是用参与者最熟悉的
只有这样，才能让参与者很容易地听出差别来
很不幸地是，某些人组织盲听的目的，就是要得出一个“听不出差别”的结论，于是所有的安排都是围绕着这个目的来进行的
至少，国外的这类盲听报道，我还真没见过几个是安排要让人“听得出差别”的

jjx01 · 发表于 2013-10-20 18:16

本帖最后由 jjx01 于 2013-10-20 18:19 编辑

酷风发表于 2013-10-19 22:09
% z" F h, p% |; n真正的盲听应该是让参与者处于最好的状态 x+ \. |7 d$ P7 R9 \
也就是说：其余器材都用参与者最熟悉的，音乐也是用参与者最熟 ...

这个老外也早就做过了：

LONG TERM LISTENING: A lot of blind testing involves switching between A and B, or replaying music tracks after something is changed. Critics of these tests argue that’s not the best way to evaluate audio gear. They say you must live with it for a while to appreciate the differences (never mind most of them claim to swap out a piece of gear and hear immediate and obvious differences). David Clark and Laurence Greenhill came up with a clever idea. They made a bunch of sealed black boxes where some had a direct connection inside while others distorted the audio signal to a significant degree. They were built with high-end connectors, etc. They sent the boxes home with members of a local audiophile club to live with and decide if they had a “straight wire” box or one that did ugly things to the audio. Despite living with them for a while, the audiophiles who took the boxes home failed to determine which was which. The same boxes, however, were identified with relative ease in a blind A/B/X test. This demonstrated the exact opposite of what many audiophiles claim: Long term listening is less sensitive than A/B/X testing. This test, and others, are summarized in Ten Years of ABX Testing（http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=5549）.
那个“十年abx测试结果”的网页要付费才能看，我是穷比一个，发烧友都是有钱的，看看不妨。

酷风 · 发表于 2013-10-30 20:43

看不到，有什么好说的？

jjx01 · 发表于 2013-10-30 21:58

本帖最后由 jjx01 于 2013-10-30 21:59 编辑

看不到就已能看到的作者的话作准咯，当然能找到反面材料也可以
做个黑箱让发烧友带回家去听它几周都没问题，最后还是听不出差别，哈哈
不过如果非盲听呢，发烧友的耳朵就突然灵敏了，一下就能听出差别，根本不用”熟悉器材“

亚克蜥 · 发表于 2013-11-3 10:40

裤缝又在玩双口相声

酷风 · 发表于 2013-11-9 19:27

亚克蜥发表于 2013-11-3 10:40 : S5 l7 r3 y' j; b- X
裤缝又在玩双口相声[w00t>

这种月经东西也不知道是那个sb，总拿出来挑战权威

帐号		自动登录	找回密码
密码			注册