AndreasG Wrote: > From a scientific point of view, there's no evidence to support that > "belief". But I do understand your point and I do not want to get into > a debate about ABX blind testing... > > The process of adaption is the strongest reason why it is necessary to > switch between sources without a pause. Human senses don't respond well > to "absolute values", this is why it is so important that the comparison > takes place without pauses. (You can listen to one source as long as you > want, though.) > > Imagine you would have to compare two colours, or two shades of grey > and decide which one is brighter. This is very easy if you see them > next to each other, it will be very hard if some time passes between > seeing the one and the other. Adaption is the reason for that.
I think you are talking about memory -not adaption. A better example is listening to a system with a large amount of treble energy. Your ears will then adapt and you will not percieve the treble as quite as piercing after a little while. Now, if you switch to a system with less treble energy, it will sound dull. So even if the second system is more accurate, and will sound far better in the long run, in an A/B you might well chose the first system as the better one. AndreasG Wrote: > This is arguable. However, in this special case, I believe that a A/B > comparison ist the only way... And since the original poster said that > he heard a big difference between the two sources, it should be easy to > verify that in a blind test. If cannot here the difference in a level > matched blind test, then it would be most likely that the difference he > heard was due to level differences. A/B has its uses, but it is possible to miss difference during quick A/B for a variety of reasons. For example due to the source material. Or because the auditory system needs time to tune in to what we are hearing. If you study how you percieve sound you will find that the sound stage builds up gradually, rather than is just "there". Of course, the brain masks this incompleteness very well, just like you don't think about the fact that vision outside the central area is a blurred mess. A good example how deceptive A/B can be are those tests that claim 128 kbps AAC to be indistinguishable from CD, for example. -- P Floding ------------------------------------------------------------------------ P Floding's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2932 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=22273 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
