@David A , with respect, I think you're missing my point. At the risk of taking this thread further off topic...
It's possible that terminology is the problem here. I thought we were all using the word "difference" to mean "a noticeable change in sound quality"; apologies for seeming obtuse if that's not what you meant.
Since sound quality is purely subjective, any report of sound quality difference is unique to the individual(s) who did the listening. Therefore if they hear a difference, or do not, then the (subjective) difference is unarguably there or not, as the case may be. (Unless they are deliberately mis-reporting, hence the caveat in my previous post -- not that I think there's any of that going on here!)
One person's subjective experience doesn't give any significant information about whether anyone else may or may not hear a difference, or indeed whether there is an objective -- that is, measurable in principle, even if perhaps not in practice -- difference in output from the system (say, at the point where sound waves enters the listener's ear).
Of course if you have enough listeners independently and repeatably reporting a sound quality difference, that starts to build evidence that there may be an objective change in output of the system, but in principle listening tests can never answer that question with certainty. Conversely there may be an objective change in output that no-one ever reports hearing.
In any case, there is no "right" or "wrong" and nothing to "prove" either way about whether or not any given listener hears a difference, since the experience is personal and subjective. In particular there is no conflict or mystery to be resolved if some listeners do and some do not hear a difference, whether or not there is an objective change in output
It's possible that terminology is the problem here. I thought we were all using the word "difference" to mean "a noticeable change in sound quality"; apologies for seeming obtuse if that's not what you meant.
Since sound quality is purely subjective, any report of sound quality difference is unique to the individual(s) who did the listening. Therefore if they hear a difference, or do not, then the (subjective) difference is unarguably there or not, as the case may be. (Unless they are deliberately mis-reporting, hence the caveat in my previous post -- not that I think there's any of that going on here!)
One person's subjective experience doesn't give any significant information about whether anyone else may or may not hear a difference, or indeed whether there is an objective -- that is, measurable in principle, even if perhaps not in practice -- difference in output from the system (say, at the point where sound waves enters the listener's ear).
Of course if you have enough listeners independently and repeatably reporting a sound quality difference, that starts to build evidence that there may be an objective change in output of the system, but in principle listening tests can never answer that question with certainty. Conversely there may be an objective change in output that no-one ever reports hearing.
In any case, there is no "right" or "wrong" and nothing to "prove" either way about whether or not any given listener hears a difference, since the experience is personal and subjective. In particular there is no conflict or mystery to be resolved if some listeners do and some do not hear a difference, whether or not there is an objective change in output
Roon (Mac Mini), Wilson Benesch Full Circle, Expert 1000 Pro CI, Kaiser Chiara
Warwickshire, UK
