Originally Posted by aarons915
Many of Dr. Toole's studies are published in the AES site and are peer-reviewed, anyone in the audio world can run similar studies to verify the results. Also, KEF agrees with their approach to speaker design and their measurement philosophy, you can see in the latest R series and Reference whitepapers that they use the "spinorama" measurement format. As far as sighted vs blind tests, Dr. Olive(I know another Dr in front of his name....) was part of a pretty good study that compared the identical speakers with the same listeners and showed how different preference ratings are sighted vs blind, here's the link: http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/0...o-product.html
I'm not sure why people wouldn't want the science on what kind of speakers most people prefer and whether expensive cables or amps make much difference in the sound, I mean I don't know about anyone else but I'd like to save money on things like speaker cables if I know lamp cord will sound just as good.
Completely agree that this is an important topic, we all spend a lot of money on our audio/video equipment so regardless of price range it should be in everyone's interest to know what you should spend your money on, which is why it's so strange that there is so little factual information and discussion around it.
Thanks for the link, interesting read, especially the comments section, but really it's from a 10 year old article, that in turn references a 25 year old test (!), there really has to be far more recent tests than that done in the last year or so, and again no data whatsoever from the study, and basically nothing about how the test was conducted, all we get is a tiny chart of listener preferences, that really says nothing about what is correct/better. For all we can see from that, the sighted test could be the more correct one, and the blind test could be wrong, who's to say? One thing I've noticed with these little charts they display is that the blind tests always have far less differences between in this case the tested speakers than the sighted tests. Does that mean the speakers actually sound more similar, or that when people are tested blind have no visual cues to tell them apart, as they do in a sighted test? And why the enormous differences in the blind tests with different speaker placements, and there's no reasoning or explanation in the article why that is. A couple of those speakers get their rating HALVED from being in a different position, which really makes no sense unless they knowingly tried to make the speaker sound as bad as possible in one position, but again there's no explanation in the article one way or the other.
It's also strange in these speaker blind tests that supposedly all test subjects completely agree on the overall ranking of the speakers, which makes no sense when in the real world people have completely different ears & taste in sound & music genres and some prefer speakers with a completely different sound than others, a speaker that sounds great to you may sound like complete junk to me, which is why we have so many different speaker brands with completely different sound signatures.
Also, why is it that all of these blind tests are apparently done by Harman. Like this test for example, and 3 out of 4 speakers were Harman speakers. Not a very broad impartial test now is it? Blind tests like these should be performed by an outside impartial 3rd party with no financial gain from the outcome, I would be far more likely to trust tests made with forum members on avsforum, posting all relevant data for everyone to see and compare/verify.
Originally Posted by modenacart
He has. As most of his work was for the Canadian government.
Ok that's great, link please. If we can't read it, understand it & verify it, it's useless.