rocky500 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I asked two questions: What's the difference between selecting an orchestra member and selecting speakers or cables? How can blind testing be effective in one area of audio, but not another? I am not interested in you misdirection. I asked two legitimate questions for discussion. To me the article suggests more to me that is a random pick now with blind testing. So I do not think it would help in Audio for me for selecting a product. I still do it all the time but never have consistent results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satanica Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Stupid thread/article is stupid. No offense. Good tread/article is good. Stupid responses. No offense. Edited September 7, 2015 by Satanica 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newman Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I think the OP is making the point that when an important decision is needed, and there is the potential for bias, you have to eliminate that bias if you want the right decision. He is making the point that everywhere except audiophile-land, this simple reality is acknowledged and acted upon. How hard is that to understand? The only thing left to discuss is whether there is potential for bias during sighted hifi listening. Tested, re-tested, confirmed: answer is YES. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 To me the article suggests more to me that is a random pick now with blind testing. So I do not think it would help in Audio for me for selecting a product. I still do it all the time but never have consistent results. Wouldn't that suggest that the orchestra selectors are guessing in their selections? I have no insight, but I'd like to think that selectors for professional musicians have at least some clue. Perhaps I'm wrong? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky500 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Oh my! It couldn't actually be that women can play as good as men could it and therefore get selected somewhat equally. No, that could never happen! More likely when they all get to this stage auditioning for a orchestra, they are all very good. So it really comes down to how the judge interrupts it for themselves. I bet if there is more than 1 judge, then the opinions will be quite different and who they liked best. So I reckon it still now becomes a random selection. Edited September 7, 2015 by rocky500 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 All this is telling me is that the auditioning panels in these situations are heavily biased towards men, and wow, what a shock. This cannot in any way shape or form be converted to blind testing for audio gear. Stupid thread/article is stupid. No offense. No you can't do something productive. You must stay here and post contrary views. <twists Sime's arm> ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sime Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Really, is this being bebated? Why one muscian is better than another? Really................it's not science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest myrantz Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 As noted previously in this thread, the research is well documented. The authors can be easily found. As with Myrantz, if you want to discredit the research you should take it up with the authors. I'm not discrediting the research. They have on face value convinced me blind testing remove gender bias... I'm discrediting you - for insisting a blind test designed to remove gender bias in orchestra auditioning have anything to do with audiophiles confirming their decisions. In the research, the successful recruit don't actually have to pass a 95% confidence test that he/she is male or female.... In the research, the goal is not to hire a male or a female (A vs B).... Your article and audiophile blind testing are so completely different and the goals are not even the same - I have no idea why you'd link one to the other.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky500 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Wouldn't that suggest that the orchestra selectors are guessing in their selections? I have no insight, but I'd like to think that selectors for professional musicians have at least some clue. Perhaps I'm wrong? Wasn't there a test for experienced professionals to guess what brand violin was used on stage and they really had no clue. Edited September 7, 2015 by rocky500 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Really, is this being bebated? Why one muscian is better than another? Really................it's not science. Sorry mate. I'm still not clear what your line of argument is. Happy to argue what ever your point is, but it's just reading like denigrating comments at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest myrantz Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Wasn't there a test for experienced professionals to guess what brand violin was used on stage and they really had no clue. Ouch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Wasn't there a test for experinenced professionals to guess what brand violin was used on stage and they really had no clue. indeed there was. A Stradivarius no less; it was done twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satanica Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 More likely when they all get to this stage auditioning for a orchestra, they are all very good. So it really comes down to how the judge interrupts it for themselves. I bet if there is more than 1 judge, then the opinions will be quite different and who they liked best. So I reckon it still now becomes a random selection. Well you must have telekinesis to look into the mind of each and every judge. A 50-50 result does not necessarily mean selections have been made randomly, like drawn out of a hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Here's the paper for those who would like to read the details http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sime Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 @ Blind testing cables is not the same as blind testing musicians. If you can't see this point, then I don't know what else I can add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Look over to check which amp I am actually listening too and those sessions that are relaxing and enjoyable is the more expensive amp. You did a blind audition with a longer test period. Good stuff. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satanica Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Blind testing cables is not the same as blind testing musicians. You are right! One tests cables and one tests musicians Edited September 7, 2015 by Satanica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 @ Blind testing cables is not the same as blind testing musicians. If you can't see this point, then I don't know what else I can add. I asked two questions in the original post. What's the difference between selecting an orchestra member and selecting speakers or cables? How can blind testing be effective in one area of audio, but not another? If your point is that you think they are different but you have no basis for your views, that's fine. If you think it is so bleeding obvious that you aren't going to bother explaining it to me, that's also fine. But just saying things like it's common-sense is unhelpful. I wouldn't have asked the question in the original post if I thought it was common-sense. So feel free to help me understand why it's common-sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Auditioning for an orchestra compared to listening to different components to hear which sounds better are ... Two completely different situations. Could very well be for some people, yes. With the orchestra audition .... you really want to make sure you are choosing the "best", and you want to make sure that our known biases are not getting in the way. The consequences for "choosing wrong" are significant. With the playback system audition .... it doesn't matter if we didn't choose the "best", only that we like the sound the most. It doesn't matter if the choice was affected by our biases. The consequences of "choosing wrong" are irrelevant - because we like the sound, and that's all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sime Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Ok, let's put Jimi Hedricks behind a sheet playing Foxy Lady and then let's put someone else. Do you need me to explain that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 In the way orchestras are doing it, it's actually adding in an element of randomness, as the assessors are forced to make a decision with incomplete information, and that incomplete information choice leads to better woman representation. (i.e. previously they have a tendencyto hire male performers, now it's more up to chance. Not chance? In the article, there is no confidence test to say with 95% confidence that the selection is random(chance) or specific. It did say the woman's likelihood is now 50%, i.e. it's a random guess... This doesn't mean it's a "random guess" .... it means that a man (50%) or a woman (50%) is equally as likely to be considered good enough to play in their orchestra. When they know the sex, they are more likely to select men When they don't know the sex, men and women are chosen equally, based on their playing (not on "guessing") 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newman Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 With the playback system audition .... it doesn't matter if we didn't choose the "best", only that we like the sound the most. It doesn't matter if the choice was affected by our biases. The consequences of "choosing wrong" are irrelevant - because we like the sound, and that's all that matters. If you want to be sure you like 'the sound', you have to be sure to eliminate non-sonic bias. Why do you say 'it doesn't matter'? It might have been affected by one unit being bright yellow (equivalent to female) and you have an anti-yellow bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I prefer to take my time This has been covered over and over and over. There is nothing about any type of controlled testing which necessarily limits the amount of time you can listen. If I were running a controlled test on a design change .... I would listen for exactly however long I wanted to. Sometimes that might be all week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) If you want to be sure you like 'the sound', you have to be sure to eliminate non-sonic bias. (devils advocate) No I don't. I can tell you if I like after exactly 0.3 seconds. It my preference, and I can decide it however I wish. So, I made a difference choice when I knew something about the source? So what?! PS - All yellow speakers sound bad to me. Edited September 7, 2015 by davewantsmoore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fordgtlover Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Ok, let's put Jimi Hedricks behind a sheet playing Foxy Lady and then let's put someone else. Do you need me to explain that? The challenge isn't whether you could pick Hendricks or Vai or Satriani blind. That's (probably) easy. The test in question would have you find a range of players who can play Hendricks' music and then pick your preference without seeing any of the performers - only listening. Unsighted would you choose the middle-aged woman or the twenty-something rockstar? Edited September 7, 2015 by fordgtlover 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts