cheekyboy Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 Can someone explain to me exactly what controlled listening is? Qué......?
metal beat Posted February 14, 2012 Author Posted February 14, 2012 Pretty much.It is taking away what you see and what you know so that you can use your ears and only your ears to judge what you hear. The idea is to remove bias and make the findings repeatable. Sighted testing is completely flawed in that you know what is under test and / or you can see what is under test. Everyone (there are no exceptions) are subject to bias (many different forms). The 'only' way to remove that bias is to do objective testing. It is a very very simple topic. Yet many people make every excuse under the sun on why it is not so. You can either hear a difference under controlled tests or you can not. There is nothing more to it. People that trust their ears are not afraid of objective testing. How long do you do your blind testing for. 2 songs back n forth, 30 minutes, hours or a week? What variety of music do you play or is it the same test recordings each time? Personally I have found that blind or sighted testing for short periods of time creates more questions than answers. One subjectively start to focus on parts of the music that is easy to differentiate, or what appeals to your subjective taste. You may end up not listening to the music when the period is short.
proftournesol Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 Music should never be about objective or controlled listening. it should be about opinions, emotions, impressions and subjective choices.If anyone doesn't agree I don't care:nana Maybe it should be about both! These things aren't exclusive. Think about something like a car purchase: you look at the objective evidence - price, economy, size, service costs resale value, reliability record etc, but you also note your emotional response as you have to drive the thing. You don't choose between them, why should music be any different?
Drizt Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) I would like to know how you do it? Simple. 0). Before I do any testing I listen to the components sighted for as long as it takes for me to get a good handle on the sonic signatures. Once I am certain I can tell a difference between them then I will put that theory to the test. 1). I level match the components as best as I can (measurements are used). 2). I get someone to do the switches between the objects under test in a way that means that I don't know and can't see which object is playing at any one time. 3). I usually do around 10 switches between the components and then mark down which component I think I am listening to (on each iteration I mark down what I think I am listening to) 4). The person helping me then reveals what I was listening to on each iteration and I compare my findings with those to get a score out of 10. 5). A score of 50% or around that would mean that I was not able to tell a difference. A score of around 80% means that I can tell a difference most of the time. 100% obviously means the differences are very easily distinguished. There is no real voodoo to it. It really boils down to putting you ears to the test to see if the differences you 'think' you hear actually do exist. Now before this thread becomes a vehicle for laughing at the pro-objective testing forum members I'll leave you guys to it. Edited February 14, 2012 by Drizt
davidsss Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 Objective listening seems quite a simple concept to me and a few have attempted to explain it already. From what I can gather it involves comparing 2 or more of the same variable without knowing which option is being played at the time. So, for example, you could compare CD players by playing them through a particular amp, speakers, DAC etc and then switch in a different CD player and leave everything else the same. For those who champion objective listening tests this is the only true way to compare equipment. This really is the easy part of the topic. The hard part is the argument over whether "objective" listening is necessarily and by definition superior to "subjective" listening. One could add that economic theory works on a similar principle of changing one variable at the time, and we can all see where that got us DS
Drizt Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 How long do you do your blind testing for. 2 songs back n forth, 30 minutes, hours or a week? What variety of music do you play or is it the same test recordings each time? Personally I have found that blind or sighted testing for short periods of time creates more questions than answers. One subjectively start to focus on parts of the music that is easy to differentiate, or what appeals to your subjective taste. You may end up not listening to the music when the period is short. My answer is: As long as it takes! I take as long as I want to do subjective listening. If I feel I can tell a difference (this maybe after days or listening to various music) then I will put myself through some objective testing. I will use songs that I felt I could hear a difference during sighted testing. Really.... its no different to sighted testing other than I can't see what is under test or know what is under test. Therefore, if I 'need' to see or know what is under test to actually hear a difference (i.e. I couldn't hear it under objective test conditions) then it is possible I was suffering from the placebo effect. I think that probably is enough now to answer your question ?
Drizt Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 Maybe it should be about both! These things aren't exclusive. Think about something like a car purchase: you look at the objective evidence - price, economy, size, service costs resale value, reliability record etc, but you also note your emotional response as you have to drive the thing. You don't choose between them, why should music be any different? My last post in here, I promise. Prof is right. It is not 'just' one or the other. If you want to 'prove' a difference exists there is no other way that to use 'objective' testing. Please note the word 'prove'. Also note this fact is not negotiable. It is just the way it is. If you have no need / want to 'prove' the difference is real then objective testing is not required.
metal beat Posted February 14, 2012 Author Posted February 14, 2012 Maybe it should be about both! These things aren't exclusive. Think about something like a car purchase: you look at the objective evidence - price, economy, size, service costs resale value, reliability record etc, but you also note your emotional response as you have to drive the thing. You don't choose between them, why should music be any different? I don't disagree, however music and hifi is not like a car. At least to most us audiofools I doubt anyone would select something based on the right price, size , etc and keep the item long term if they did not like the music it produced - and that would be a subjective decision ultimately. It could be more comparative testing in hifi/music than objective when ultimately making your emotional/subjective decision on what to buy.
Once was an audiophile Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 Listening is an action.You may have an emotional response to what you 'hear' but listening is not an emotion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_and_emotion Don't forget the music part with emotion
metal beat Posted February 14, 2012 Author Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) If you want to 'prove' a difference exists there is no other way that to use 'objective' testing. Please note the word 'prove'. Also note this fact is not negotiable. It is just the way it is. If you have no need / want to 'prove' the difference is real then objective testing is not required. Not negotiable? proves nothing. IMO your objective testing is nothing but comparative testing with your subjective listening ultimately deciding what is better for you. the same person in the room may not agree with your objective results. but like anyone, I can respect your subjective opinion on the matter, just not agree:p Edited February 14, 2012 by turntable
rantan Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 I wanted to say it but.......................................
nofixedaddress Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) How are the variations in music content taken into account when listening in this way? Different equipment can handle variations in music content in a different manner. As I see it the tests outlined above all make the assumptions that the music content is homogeneous - contains no variations that could be handled differently. For instance a piece of gear handles female vocals better but during the test a female is singing for only 3 times out of 10. The result would be "no difference" where one does exist. How do you guys handle that? NFA Edited February 14, 2012 by nofixedaddress gramma :-)
wolster Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 To go through the process that Drizt described would require an anal-retentive disposition and a suspension of enjoyment in listening to good music.. I couldn't be bothered.
Once was an audiophile Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 I wanted to say it but....................................... Please pm it too me i will post it
Once was an audiophile Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 To go through the process that Drizt described would require an anal-retentive disposition and a suspension of enjoyment in listening to good music..I couldn't be bothered. i think a majority of people on the forum think the way you do my guess 90%+
Dr X Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 How do the variations in music content taken into account when listening in this way? Different equipment can handle variations in music content in a different manner. As I see it the test outlined about all make the assumption that the music content is homogeneous - contains no variations that could be handled differently. For instance a piece of gear handles female vocals better but during the test a female is singing for only 3 times. The result would be "no difference" where one does exist. How do you guys handle that? NFA No, what you're implying is wrong. The TEST outlined by Drizt did not impose any restriction to what music content was played, the test subject gets to decide what that is. The TEST outlined did NOT make the assumption that music is homogenous. The TEST outline is a method to prove a hypothesis which was HYPOTHESISED BY THE TEST SUBJECT, I can't stress this enough. Don't confuse objective TRIALING with objective TESTING, which I believe you're doing. PS: They don't hand out year 12 certificates, diplomas and degrees because some little teenage **** says "I know it". What they claim they know (course requirements) has to be proven under PROPERLY CONTROLLED OBJECTIVE TESTING.
Dr X Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 To go through the process that Drizt described would require an anal-retentive disposition and a suspension of enjoyment in listening to good music..I couldn't be bothered. I think you're being a total prick.
Once was an audiophile Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 PS: They don't hand out year 12 certificates, diplomas and degrees because some little teenage **** says "I know it". What they claim they know (course requirements) has to be proven under PROPERLY CONTROLLED OBJECTIVE TESTING. And how many components in your system Dr.x are chosen by PROPERLY CONTROLLED OBJECTIVE TESTING?
Guest Muon Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 I think you're being a total prick.That's an opinion, and It's an incorrect one... obviously!Do the tests, you will find I'm right!
Once was an audiophile Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 I think you're being a total prick. What wolster! Now way he is a true gentleman i think if you payed him he could not be a prick in fact its about time wolster speaks his mind on this forum. Feed wolster more red :party
Guest Muon Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 To go through the process that Drizt described would require an anal-retentive disposition and a suspension of enjoyment in listening to good music..I couldn't be bothered. I couldn't agree more.
wolster Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 That's an opinion, and It's an incorrect one... obviously!Do the tests, you will find I'm right! Thanks, datafone - and Mario.
nofixedaddress Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 How do ensure that the music you are using to test with contains all the content you want? I.E. Dynamics (macro and micro), frequency extension, decay, imaging, etc etc? Not implying any thing Doc. If the test subject decides what to play then there is the possibility of a null result where there in fact is a positive result. Or are you getting upset that the rigorous test could be easily biased depending by the choice of music used. Just pointing out what I see as something that is over looked. Feel free to continue yelling......... NFA
Dr X Posted February 14, 2012 Posted February 14, 2012 And how many components in your system Dr.x are chosen by PROPERLY CONTROLLED OBJECTIVE TESTING? Every ... single ... one.
Recommended Posts