4 ms·

Without being present there, I can't analyze actual execution of the test, but test methodology can still be evaluated. Playing A & B samples and asking which

Without being present there, I can't analyze actual execution of the test, but test methodology can still be evaluated. Playing A & B samples and asking which one is better/original requires much more from the listener that just hearing a difference between the two. It is possible to hear the difference, but not know which is which as that requires additional knowledge. To avoid this issue you could: Play (in random order) original twice and processed once and asking which one was different/processed. Or play two sequences (in random order), [original, original] and [original, processed] and ask, if processed was in the first or second sequence. Second option might focus better on short-term memory, because it has shorter sequences (2 samples vs 3 samples per sequence). This would produce a better measurement of whether the difference is audible or not.

saaaaaam 3y ago
We actually did something more along the lines of your first suggestion - we were asking for difference not specifically “which is better” because actually “better” is entirely contextual (and actually this was part of the point - that some people actually prefer lower quality audio because it’s what they are used to). I think (it’s a long time ago now) that we played each set which was two or three samples twice and rather than asking which was “original” I think we asked them to score for clarity, richness and which they preferred - and then to make a guess about which was a higher/lower quality source file. Like I say, it wasn’t a rigorously scientific experiment but it was in the context of a conference about evolution of audio standards and what that meant for audio delivery from labels/distributors to DSPs.