Originally Posted by Daniel-a
If the troll was serious he wouldn'T use DBT as an argument.
DBT have proved that it was possible to make someone buy lesser and in the long run unsatisfied audio component just because with fast switching people are unable to hear the difference.
I know have been fooled in the past. I was a DBT believer until It proved that my nakamichi cassette deck was no different than a cheap 99$ no name cassette deck. I sold my nak and bought that cheap cassette deck ( It was something like Juliette or Candle).
Being less and less satisfied with that new deck. I ask my brother to lend me his own nak for 2 weeks. ( He was going on vacation).
So I took time to listen cafefully to both. Than I ask My girlfriend to put tapes in one of them. I listened for many hours and I took notes. Latter on, she played the other tape deck. Again I listened for many hours taking notes.
Finally, I compared my notes. One was clearly better than the other. It was my brother's Nak ( the same that I used to have before being fooled buy double blind tests.)
p.s. I was not just taking notes, I was listening to music.
How could a double blind test "prove" a $99.00 cassette was no different than your Nakamichi if you actually did listen to both, carefully? If you couldn't hear the difference in a DBT, then how could you hear the difference when you listened to one, then listened to the other? How could you fool yourself with a carefully conducted DBT? Seems very irrational.
I have a hunch that if you did the double blind test over again, and really conducted it properly and listened carefully, that there would be a noticeable difference, and not only that, but you could pick out the better unit.
Double blind testing has been used for many years, successfully, as a method of eliminating bias in testing. Your claim that DBT, in your DBT, assuming it was really a DBT, "fooled" your ears and your mind into believing there was no diference in the cassette players. I have listened to a lot of cassette players, a few in double blind tests, and each one did sound a bit different. Almost always the high end one sounded better than the low priced ones, but middle priced ones were much harder to pick out. The very cheap ones were obviously inferior, usually in the high end, when I used recordings of triangles for testing. This was a long time ago, and I do recall the Nakamichi as being a favorite.
My personal opinion is that you did hot conduct a proper and careful double blind test, and also that you want to believe that you were fooled by the test. I believe there is an old saying that one of the easiest people to fool is oneself.
I recall a double blind test done on vodka by several people, where a snooty guy said he would drink nothing but "Grey Goose", very expensive, vodka. He was quite sure of his choices. But when the test results were shown, he had placed "Grey Goose" at the bottom of his list. Expense of a product has a significant powers of suggestion.