Research Report LGRP#1

OVERVIEW of the methodology, main results and main conclusions of blind and non-blind playing and listening tests by
• 1 Guitarists/Listeners
• 2 Public Audiences

(1) BLIND and NON-BLIND TESTS by Guitarist and Listener (3 sessions)

   The test-sessions consisted of:
            - Pair testing / Blind
            - Group testing / Blind
            - Assessment of aesthetics / Non-blind
            - Pair testing / Non-blind
            - Interview with the guitarist and listener

METHODOLOGY

(Abbreviations: G = Guitarist / L = Listener / T = Tropical / NT = Non-Tropical )

PAIR TESTING, BLIND / METHOD

- 12 pairs were tested.

- Each pair consisted of a Tropical (T) and a Non-Tropical (NT) guitar.

- 2 pairs were presented twice to test consistency of preferences / actually there  were only 10 pairs

   but the guitarist (G) and the listener (L) were unaware of this.

- G was blindfolded. L was behind an acoustically transparent screen.

- G played the same piece of test music on every guitar.

- G played each of the two guitars (1 T and 1 NT in a pair) in succession, time Limit: 30 seconds per guitar.

- G and L are then asked which of the 2 guitars they prefer. Three possibilities: No. 1 / No. 2 / No Preference. 

GROUP TESTING, BLIND / METHOD

- 4 groups of 5 guitars were presented / Each group consisted of 3 or 4 Non-Tropicals (NT’s) and 1 or 2 Tropicals (T’s)

- In each group 1 guitar was presented twice to test voting consistency (so actually only 4 different guitars were

   assessed  per group).

- G was blindfolded. 

- Assessment method per group: To get a first impression of the guitars in the group, G played each guitar for 30

   seconds. After that G was now free to play what he wanted and for as long he wanted. He could ask for any guitar in any

   order.  

- Finally G rated the guitars:  Very good / Good / Average / Poor / Very poor,  and he was asked to say which guitar he found

   ‘the best’ in the group (he was allowed to give the same rating to more  then 1 guitar if he wanted).

   Finally G was asked to explain, in his own words, why he found his favorite guitar the best out of the group.

Note: Group testing blind was only conducted with the Guitarists, not with the Listeners

PAIR TESTING, NON-BLIND / METHOD

- Same as ‘Pair Test Blind’, but now the 10 pairs were assessed without any pairs being tested twice.

- The order of the pairs was different but the order of the guitars within the pairs was the same as in ‘PairTesting Blind'

RESULTS:

  Fig 1

 Fig 2

RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS of the BLIND and NON-BLIND TESTS by guitarists and listeners over 3 sessions

Result:

There was a strong consistency in the results per guitarist and listener across all of the three sessions.

Conclusion:

The tests were consistently good in quality and performance and therefore provide a reliable source of information.

Result:

Score consistency for double pairs and double guitars in the groups is much better for guitarists than for the listeners

(pair testing blind: average guitarists scores: 83 %, average listeners scores: 17 %   (Fig 2)

Conclusion:

Playing the guitars allows for a much better consistency in assessment than just ‘passive’ listening. Results of (playing) guitarists are therefore more reliable (although preference results between guitarists and listeners are very similar).

Result:

Non-Tropical Guitars and Tropical Guitars were equally preferred for sound quality (around 50/50%). Fig 1

The only exception was Listener 1 in the pair test, but his consistency in this test was 0%). 

Conclusion:

Experienced guitar players and listeners were unable to distinguish T’s from NT’s at better than chance levels. All blind tests show that it is possible to make equally good sounding guitars from both Tropical and Non-Tropical Woods.

Results:

When guitarists and listeners could see the guitars, and they knew from which woods they were made, we see a very strong difference in sound perception: ± 50% fallback for the Non-Tropicals compared with the same Non-Tropicals in the ‘blind’ testing (from 50% blind to 25% non-blind, Fig 1)

Conclusion:

Sound perception is strongly influenced by aesthetics and preconceptions of what are the ‘best’ woods for making guitars. Prejudices play an important role in what guitar players and listeners think sounds good or bad.

• (2)  BLIND and NON-BLIND TESTING by public audience in Belgium and Finland

METHODOLOGY

- Two audience test sessions were carried out in concert hall conditions, 

   one in Belgium (44 listeners),  one in Finland (22 listeners).

- A session consisted Blind and Non-Blind pair tests.

- The same guitars were used as in the 'Blind' and 'Non-Blind pair tests for Guitarists/Listeners (see above)

-  A guitarist played the guitars in pairs  (one T and 1 NT) to a ‘Blind’ audience  (screened off from the guitarist)

   and subsequently to a Non-Blind audience (that could see the guitars and were told the woods used for backs and sides).

- The audience was asked to vote for their preferred guitar in each pair.

   Three preference possibilities:  No. 1 / No. 2 / No Preference.

- In addition they had to note if they found the sound of the 2  guitars in one pair; Very close/Close/Different/ Very Different.

- In the Audience Blind testing 2 pairs were presented twice (as in the Pair Test Blind, see above)  to check consistency

   of voting preference.

RESULTS:

Questions and remarks about this study can be send to leonardo.guitar.research@cmbpuurs.be