In Reply to: I have said this a million times. I want a blind test on an posted by Duilawyer on June 26, 2003 at 20:54:48:
Since were talking the Stones here try "Lady Jane" from Aftermath. The difference between the redbook and SACD layer is (to me) very, very obvious. Mick's voice sounds very different on the SACD layer because you can hear a lot of reflections off the studio walls that cannot be heard on the redbook layer. Try it and see if you hear a difference.Of course this will prove nothing to a steadfast skeptic. One could always argue that ABCKO mucked up the redbook layer on purpose to make the SACD layer sound better. Also, in the absence of a scientifically controlled blind ABX test, how do I know I am not just imagining the difference? What to Do?
As for you’re A/B testing suggestion: I don't put much stock in blind testing. I once did a blind taste test in which I compared some cheap frozen chocolate yogurt to chocolate Hagen Daz ice cream. Guess what? During the taste test I could not reliably tell the difference between the two.
Does this mean my taste buds are defective? Does it mean there is no difference in taste between cheap frozen yogurt and premium ice cream? Should I have decided that makers of premium ice cream are all charlatans (Damn you Ben and Jerry!)? I don't think so.
Instead I think the stress of the test conditions had an affect on my ability to make judgments. I don't normally eat ice cream blindfolded, or have someone else spoon-feed me. I also don't switch back and forth between brands trying to guess which is which. No, I make myself a big bowl of ice cream, sit back on my couch and enjoy it. (Damn ice cream is good. By the time I’m done with a bowl, I just feel good. You know what I mean?)
The same applies to audio. When I want to enjoy some music I sit back on my couch and enjoy it. I let the music wash over me, I let it move me. Quick back-and-forth tests are not the way we normally listen to and enjoy music, and tell us little about which components or sources are better, IMO. In any case, A/B testing is something that audiophiles have been arguing about for years, I doubt we will put the argument to rest here.
I have a suggestion for you DUI, and I mean this in the nicest possible way, and in the spirit of helpfulness. You have been doing the SACD thing for a while now. If you genuinely don’t hear a difference between SACD and CD, if SACD is not bringing you more musical pleasure—give up on it now. It’s no big deal.
Now if you want to assume that those who do hear a difference (or believe they hear a difference) are all fools, that’s okay with me. Personally, I would be a bit more charitable and assume that these people are either hearing something I do not, or are just hearing things differently than me. In any case, from your many posts on the subject it is clear that SACD is bringing you no added pleasure beyond redbook. For me, listening to music has always been about pleasure, whether on a cheap system, or my current more expensive (but still humble by audiophile standards) system, not torturing myself over whether I can hear a difference between this or that. If you are not getting any added pleasure, why bother?
Anyway, I think I’m going to fix myself a bowl of ice cream tonight and listen to some music by a nobody named Bill Evans (on SACD). I’m going to enjoy myself. I hope you do the same.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Try "Lady Jane" [**VERY, VERY LONG REPLY--SORRY**] - rebop 06/27/0308:39:58 06/27/03 (4)
- Gave it the test! There is no appreciable difference. - Duilawyer 09:45:40 06/28/03 (2)
- Re: Gave it the test! There is no appreciable difference. - rebop 07:34:36 06/30/03 (1)
- "music industry desperately wants a secure digital format, and SACD provides it" - Metralla 07:47:09 06/30/03 (0)
- I will give it a solid test, Saturday. Thanks for the response. nt - Duilawyer 22:05:38 06/27/03 (0)