Headphone preference tests used double-blind methods across a wide price range

Evidence

A total of 31 different headphone models from 18 manufacturers were evaluated by 130 listeners, with an approximately equal number trained and untrained (Olive et al., 2018a). The headphones ranged in price from 60 to 4000, including openand closed-back designs with dynamic or magnetic planar drivers. The same virtual headphone double-blind method was used to eliminate biases from visual and tactile cues. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1797

Categorization

• XREF: The virtual headphone double-blind method was introduced earlier in this chapter (presumably at locations covering Olive et al., 2013a methodology) and is the methodological backbone of all these preference studies. — connects to: Headphone preference tests can be run virtually via equalization. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1847; Brand, cost, and prior exposure bias subjective audio judgments; Blind listening tests make subjective sound judgments objective and repeatable — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 87 (+1 more)
• SHARE: The 31-models-from-18-manufacturers test spanning 60-4000 is precisely the kind of dataset an audio-engineering colleague would want to scrutinize for how price relates to measured frequency response.
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Headphone preference tests can be run virtually via equalization. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1847; Brand, cost, and prior exposure bias subjective audio judgments; Blind listening tests make subjective sound judgments objective and repeatable — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 87 (+1 more)