An interesting demonstration

When I was learning to listen critically last year, someone (Darko?) suggested listening not only with focused attention, but to do a crossword puzzle (e.g.) while listening. Almost a "peripheral vision" kind of move.

Wow! thanks Hilde...

Very important observation...

The great biologist Wolfgang Schad wrote a book about Peripheral Seeing and his importance to identify form and function in nature...

The neuro psychiatrist writer Iain McGilchrist in " the Master and his emissary", a seminal book, distinguish TWO modes of attention, linked to TWO way to be in the world..."Peripheral attenton" and "focused attention"..

For sure we use these 2 modes at the same times ....

With the important fact that some people are more focused on details and other to the larger context....I cannot do anything than simplifying a 500 hundred pages book here...

To complete your example of the museum...

When we look "peripherally" we could become being conscious of the environment and the link to our own body could be thought on another level completely...

The inside of our body is a vast  world which could be related to the vast world  outside of the body by a  new geometry for example...This geometry exist by the way....I cannot describe it here in this post...

Then instead to think about an object in front of a body we may think about a " function" manifested simultaneously in 2 interrelated communicating  worlds....

Then Focus attention and Peripheral attention plays TOGETHER in an evolutive perceptive process...

As a mental exercise can you do it all at once? I certainly can not.

Nobody can do it all at once ...But the point is the ability to do it is there not all at once but in an ongoing process...

I can't do it at once. I move through the various modes.
Thanks, Mahgister. Interesting ideas, there.
I think the hifi podcast guys, Darren and Duncan, also remarked on how you can tell a room/gear setup sounds good from out in the hallway. That's an interesting indicator of how sensitive we are.

Have a conversation with someone at a party, in a noisy room.

There is no problem paying perfect attention to what is being said.

We can easily isolate the details.

Put an Omni directional mic in the same room,, record everything and then try and pay attention to a singular discussion.

Good luck.

We are hardwired to listen for specifics. So what?

Watching a tv with static, if it is something we want to watch, we will keep watching, and eventually not notice the static any longer. So what?

Guess there is no need/reason to audio gear anymore…

@nonoise , no, I would say we are down to wishful thinking and reality.

mahgister, did you mean, "trunk" of an elephant? 

Somehow I have to get through to you guys that listening to the sound and listening to music are two separate things. You can listen to sounds other than music like Gun shots, baby's crying, 18 wheelers passing by. an MRI machine, an F22 flying over, etc. When I am listening to music I am not analyzing the sound. You can switch back and forth. I usually listen to the sound at the beginning of a record as a short analysis of the quality of the recording. Once I have that down and maybe make an adjustment or two I'll settle back and enjoy the music. If a new instrument or voice comes in I might analyze it for a second then settle back again. What I or anyone else for that matter thinks of the sound is totally different from what I think or anyone else thinks of the music. Just listen to any Robert Johnson recording. Pretty bad right! Ah, but the music is another story. 

mahgister, did you mean, "trunk" of an elephant?

Thanks for the correction mijostyn ...

You read my mind or i spoke very bad english or the two....





When i worked for these last years creating my audio system and room, my only goal was to reach the day when i will listen music without be bothered by the sound... Mission accomplished !
I dont paid much attention now to anything pertaining to gear or audio matters... I like to discuss with friends here but i only am marginally attentive to new audio matters....

When I am listening to music I am not analyzing the sound.

...analyzing vs. listening...the opposite ends of the spectrum.

Mixing the two can be entertaining but ultimately what is (preferably, in mho) best is the the latter anytime. ;)

Polishing a diamond endlessly will either ruin it or jade you.

...analyzing vs. listening...the opposite ends of the spectrum.

Mixing the two can be entertaining but ultimately what is (preferably, in mho) best is the the latter anytime. ;)

Polishing a diamond endlessly will either ruin it or jade you.

 I wish i would have written your post with so much well said with so much few words....

My deepest respect

Also ... we hear what we see.

Google for the McGurk effect.

rudyb, thanks a bunch for that. I did and came up with this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k8fHR9jKVM This is even better than my original link. 

All of you tweak people need to watch this. Close your eyes and listen to the sound all the way through. It never changes with your eyes closed. 

The other tie-in here is the habit some of us have of closing our eyes when we listen. Visual input conflicts with what we hear. It is easier to hear accurately with your eyes closed. Imaging is particularly sensitive to this. This proves how badly visual input can screw around with what you hear.

This also explains why nicer looking equipment seems to sound better and why manufacturers go to great length to make extraordinary looking gear when in reality they are doing nothing about sound quality. 

Visual input conflicts with what we hear. It is easier to hear accurately with your eyes closed. Imaging is particularly sensitive to this. This proves how badly visual input can screw around with what you hear.

First thanks rudyb for this enlightening example.....

But the McGurk effect is related to something way more complex than what you just said mijostyn...

What you just said is not false, it is only a half truth.... It is common place for everybody that if a sellers of cars convince you that what you see is good and costly you will perveive it ADDING the new "cues" pointed to by the sellers to your first "perception" and they will mask reality or create a new one...

But The McGurk effect POINTED to something way more deeper than what you just alleged it is... This effect manifested in 2 modes: COMBINATION or FUSION of sounds and images and COMPLEMENTARITY of the auditory brain with the visual visual brain confronted with a sound and an image interferential stimuli...



Here is an example that illustrates the phenomenon of combination:

Seen: "ba" (bilabial)
Understood: /ga/ (velar)
Perceived /bga/ (Result of the combination)





Fusion:

Seen: "ga" (velar consonant)
Heard: /ba/ (biabial consonant)
Perceived: ⁄da ⁄ (result = fusion phenomenon)



Here for example the "da" is a new potential motivation for and or in this new syllable "da", reflecting also perhaps a past motivation for the sound "da" in the language, by association of the 2 interferential stimuli...

The general motivation of the word or of the "root syllable" by new interferential "meaning" created by association participate of speech creative mechanism and history...

MOTIVATION of sounds has his own genesis and history in speech history....From Plato to Saussure...

In acoustic we create the world by translating it in "visual cues" which are informed takes on the world at large or of a room in speech perception or music listening...

Then to allege that this effect point ONLY to non creative mistakes is a complete misunderstanding of this process for your " debunker politic"....



Now this effect and his complementary double possible results, combination OR fusion, illustrate the way the brain of man work with integrating all aspect of Visual and Hearing half of the brain so to speak and is ablew to enlisten them in the motivation of sounds and images, MOTIVATION of one by the other, which is one of the deepest root of creative act of perception and of the creative gesture of speech production or of sounds or visual perception ...

Not an effect related then ONLY AND MAINLY to misperception, illusion, negative biases...Not an effect that exist to illustrate only misperception This is not EVEN WRONG.... This is half truth....





By the way Science is not a debunker business first.....James Randi dont know what science is because he used it for his OWN AGENDA...

Also ... we hear what we see.

Google for the McGurk effect.

i will add that we see also what we hear....

Thanks rudyb....