A blind test rules out cognitive bias by determining whether or not there's a perceptible character when you're not aware of the sample sources. If there's really a perceptible "Arturia sound," then one should be able to reliably pick it out from a set of anonymous sources.Your opinion is also susceptible to cognitive bias. A blind test would prove what? One synth sounds different to another? We should know that without the need for a test. I can hear "something" (as others have) in the core sound of Arturia synths but whether I could pick that sound out in a flawed and pointless "blind test" is irrelevant.If you can't hear it in a blind test, is it really there? Our sense of hearing is extremely susceptible to cognitive bias.
You can't just declare that you have no bias.I don't go into using or testing Arturia synths looking for that sound so there is no "bias". I simply hear something (or perhaps the lack of something) in their core sound and again it's not something that can be defined.

I'm reminded of an experiment done by Penn & Teller where they gave people expensive "gourmet waters" with fancy backstories. The people claimed the waters tasted better than regular water and that each sample had a distinctive flavor. In reality, all of them were the same hose water from outside the building. Our senses are extremely susceptible to external influences! It's key to be aware of it so you can minimize the effect.An analogy would be that you like the taste of a meal from one restaurant but the same meal from another is missing "something" that keeps it from being your favorite.
I said I'm skeptical, which is the correct default position until proven otherwise. I have no idea why you're getting defensive. Nothing I wrote was an attack, friend!So your bias against the idea that some people hear "something" in the Arturia synths is on full display.
Statistics: Posted by bonch — Sun Feb 02, 2025 3:41 am