We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Bang & Olufsen Beolab 18 Oak Lamella Floor Standing Speakers - seriously?!
All proving that the idiocy of man knows no bounds....... 🙄
A long time ago there was a video of someone blindfolded listening to:
£100 system
£1,000 system
£10,000 system
£100,000 system
Live violinist
Through each of the systems they played a couple of tracks from the violinist. The person then had to guess which system was which at the end. They got them all right other than the last two which they reversed but said it was a very hard call between them.
When asked which they'd buy, if money was no object then clearly 4 but in the real world they felt 2 was by far the best return on investment.
I think the results were fiddled.
As in not telling the difference between a £100k system playing a recording of the violinist -v- the violinist playing live or the fact the reviewer said if it was their money they'd buy the £1k system?
Its not the first or only time that its been done, Accoustic Research did "tests" (though hardly properly controlled blind tests) in the 60s, Wharfdale in the 50s etc and even with those much more basic systems a significant proportion of people were fooled.
Assuming you like a neutral sounding system then certainly telling 1, 2 & 3 in order seems very plausible. Things clearly get more complex if you have an unbalanced system (eg £50 mp3 player into a £100 amp into £9,850 speakers)
I do believe the results, my post was just a play on words.
