Speaker cables and devices show near-zero audible differences in blind tests

Evidence

Throughout, hundreds of listeners in hundreds of double-blind multiple-comparison tests have shown a remarkably reliable preference for the most timbrally neutral, resonance-free loudspeakers. The correlation between what is measured and what is heard is truly impressive (see Chapter 11). — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1958 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Some engineers say they must “like” the monitor loudspeaker. It is fundamentally important to like what is heard, but is it the loudspeaker or the program? Obviously, it is the combination. The program is the art that is being created for distribution to the world. Loudspeakers are technical devices that transduce electrical signals into sound. We know how to measure them. It is possible to identify loudspeakers that are the most transparent transducers of the electrical signals—as subjectively judged in double-blind evaluations. This was not always possible, and not all manufacturers are yet ready to reveal this kind of data. Independent sources exist, fortunately. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 139 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Some audio journalists are hostile to the very notion that audio is amenable to scientific investigation—asserting that only subjective opinion, preferably theirs, matters. There is nothing wrong with subjective opinions. As will be seen, it is these that have allowed for deliberate and productive research into what matters in sound reproduction. However, the opinions must be collected under circumstances in which the ever-observant human brain is deprived of information that could bias the opinion about the sound. The tests must be blind—the listeners must not know prices, brands, sizes and so forth. Ideally they should be double-blind, so the experimenter cannot bias the results. There should also be comparison sounds from competing products readily available, because humans are notoriously forgetful when it comes to recalling the details of sound quality. When this is done the subjective data begins to resemble technical measurements, in that they become impressively repeatable and, more importantly, generalizable to a large population. — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 87 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Audible resonances drove low sound-quality ratings in early blind tests; Bass phase distortion audibility remains unproven without double-blind tests.; Blind listener tests reliably favor the most neutral loudspeakers — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1958 (+7 more)

Related

• Audible resonances drove low sound-quality ratings in early blind tests (similarity 0.95)
• Blind listener tests reliably favor the most neutral loudspeakers (similarity 0.94)
• High-end audio forfeited credibility by refusing blind testing (similarity 0.89)
• Blind listening tests make subjective sound judgments objective and repeatable (similarity 0.88)
• Consumer loudspeakers rated higher than professional monitors in blind tests (similarity 0.87)
• Sighted reviewer claims about cables contradict controlled measurements (similarity 0.86)
• Blind testing found 20% preferred synthesized phantom surround over real speakers (similarity 0.86)
• Subjective tests have no right answers because each listener’s perception is unique (similarity 0.86)
• Double-blind evaluation can identify the most transparent loudspeakers (similarity 0.85)
• Roughly 75 percent of people have sufficiently normal hearing to make reliable loudspeaker judgments (similarity 0.85)
• Blind listeners largely agreed on loudspeaker preferences, matching measurement quality (similarity 0.84)
• Headphone blind tests cannot use automated shuffling, so tactile cues leak into results. (similarity 0.84)
• Consumer Reports loudspeaker ratings lacked rigorous subjective validation (similarity 0.84)
• Sighted loudspeaker evaluations are demonstrably unreliable (similarity 0.83)
• Louder playback is unconsciously rated as better quality in audio listening tests (similarity 0.83)

Broader Connections

• Blind listener tests reliably favor the most neutral loudspeakers #corroborates (0.85) — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 1958
• Double-blind evaluation can identify the most transparent loudspeakers #corroborates (0.82) — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 139
• Blind listening tests make subjective sound judgments objective and repeatable #expands (0.80) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 87
• High-end audio forfeited credibility by refusing blind testing #responds-to (0.78) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 161
• Louder playback is unconsciously rated as better quality in audio listening tests #qualifies (0.75)
• Speech and solo voices are the least revealing test sounds for loudspeaker flaws #complicates (0.72) — , Toole, Floyd E - Sound reproduction-…, 383