A/B Tests...

Most times short a b testing is hard and I find myself getting 50/50 results. But when I try something new and use it for say a week or two then go back to the original the differences are there. Is that due to knowing that have made the changes or because of musical climatising?

Dru

In some ways, if an A/B comparison shows up a small difference, would you "really" notice the difference if you had "A" set-up and listened, then went on holiday for a couple of weeks and returned to system "B".

Unless there was a big difference (like someone swapped my CDX2 XPS for Bush CD player), I reckon most people wouldn't notice the change.

I can't be bothered with all the "small tweaks" as I don't want to get into that - I prefer to listen to my music - in the same way, I don't want to go down the road of listening to 20 pairs of speakers....... I'd only get confused and probably not be sure what I really wanted ;-)

So, A/B tests? Yes, they're worth it but don't get too carried away!

Remember, a Naim system straight out of the box, sitting on the floor, will better many other systems on any kind of stand!

Computers are supposed to work on 1's and 0's - in other words "Yes" or "No" - why does mine frequently say "Maybe"?......

I've always found it better to do the 'narrowing down' of choice to two or three items, then get them home for a trial as long as the dealer will allow.
IMO the differance between my CDX2 at home and in the dealers was night and day, but so it should be shouldn't it...!?!

i have the same reservations as you guys, hence the question. when i bought my first naim system, i was considering a 42/110 combination and this sounded OK -- certainly better than a lot of other combinations i had tried.

then purely coincidentally, one evening i walked into the old sound org in cathedral st. and heard lp12/32.5/250 into isobariks. this system completely bowled me over. "thats the system i want". note this wasnt a result of A/B testing -- i only listened to this one system that evening -- in fact i ended up staying a few hours enjoying a lot of records. from what i recall, the folks at sound org were enjoying themselves as well. the fact that really i couldnt afford this system was besides the point. bank loan, bread and water, etc etc...

i recall earlier trying and failing to do A/B tests on LP12 vs my old Technics deck at a shop called "subjective audio" in camden twn-- my wife was there -- and, as far as we were concerned, the difference was minimal!!!? setup?

before i went active, i listened (A/B fashion) to passive 135's vs active 250's and preferred the active route. both setups sounded very good and were it not for the fact the active system was more musical (nuances etc) i would have had great difficulty choosing between the two setups.

more recently, i had a problem with my system and no amount of A/B testing by substituting one component at a time could highlight the problem. it turns out that BOTH my 52 and 250 were faulty and single item A/B testing was never going to highlight the problem. in the end (just by pure luck) i mananed to swap out the faulty components and the nailed down the problem.

so, i guess A/B testing works when differences are night and day. but a bit difficult to use when you are looking for small, subtle differences. of course, there are "keen eared" people around who can pick up such small changes easier than the rest of us. when large or small, i dont believe A/B testing of speakers makes sense.

i would assume 52 vs 552, or cds2 vs cds3 are ideal candidates for A/B tests -- and i assume the test will probably not last that long.

SBL vs SL2 -- perhaps not so straight fwd. you would have to have both speakers at home.

now, spot the deliberate contradictions in the above and...


enjoy


ken