Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Re: Stereophile tells readers and manufacturers what they want to hear

Mr. A:

Concerning your words below:

"This subject was debated in the fall of 2005 in our online forum. "DTH" had asked, on September 6, "Why is blind testing not such a hot button with: Drug testing in the pharmaceutical field? Wine testing? Perfume testing? Food testing? Where lies the difference(s) between these (and many other) areas where blind testing is common and noncontroversial, and the audio field?"

I had responded that "it comes down to the fact that in all those fields, what is being tested is the direct effect of the stimulus. With audio, you must test the stimulus indirectly, through its effect on music, which itself has a varying effect on the listener. (I think this is why blind tests of audio components are much more sensitive using test tones than music. But then, the fact that test tones are not music removes the test one step from reality.)"

But the same can be said for wine tasting, when a critic is attempting to determine whether French Nevers oak enhances the wine to a greater degree than American oak. Or when a critic is comparing (blind) the same wine and vintage, knowing that one bottle benefited from new oak, while the other did not. Or filtered vs. unfiltered. Or when one bottle has benefited from impeccable storage conditions while the other has been deliberately "cooked." In each case wine critics have displayed an ability to differentiate "the stimulus indirectly, through its effect on {wine}..."

In the examples cited above I fail to see how the wine critic's task would be any easier than that of the audio critic.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.