RobHolt
Moderator
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2004
- Messages
- 4,126
- Reaction score
- 12
Thinking recently about the state of the audio industry, the press, forums etc and the way they test and review equipment.
The question of how to test is always a contentious one. Should it be loosely controlled, tightly controlled, individual, panel, blind, double blind, sighted etc etc.
This got me thinking about one magazine which has used a form of blind test in every issue since 1979 - H-Fi Choice. This magazine has carried a comparative group blind test in just about every issue. That's 3000+ bits of kit tested and compared over a 35 year period.
Never once in 35 years, and I'm sad enough to have read most editions, has Choice ever printed words to the effect 'item A sounded just like item B'.
So everything always sounds different to everything else, no matter how close in technical performance the items compared might be.
Given the huge range of kit over such a long timeframe, this would seem impossible to believe. So what do we think might be happening......?
The question of how to test is always a contentious one. Should it be loosely controlled, tightly controlled, individual, panel, blind, double blind, sighted etc etc.
This got me thinking about one magazine which has used a form of blind test in every issue since 1979 - H-Fi Choice. This magazine has carried a comparative group blind test in just about every issue. That's 3000+ bits of kit tested and compared over a 35 year period.
Never once in 35 years, and I'm sad enough to have read most editions, has Choice ever printed words to the effect 'item A sounded just like item B'.
So everything always sounds different to everything else, no matter how close in technical performance the items compared might be.
Given the huge range of kit over such a long timeframe, this would seem impossible to believe. So what do we think might be happening......?