Concentration

Quick thoughts:

I’m with @sns and believe that sound/music are not separable. 
@rvpiano — do you taste an apple without the texture? I think this is an apt analogy, so if you agree that those things go together, you’ll back off of the (false) between "sound" OR "music."

As Brian Eno discovered -- and most others here are mentioning -- the notion that the "best" experience aligns with one kind of attention is a bit hard to accept. It’s like asking, "What the *best* kind of conversation -- a heart to heart about deep topics or a fun, shooting the bull conversation with banter, humor, etc.?" It’s another false choice.

If you’re asking, "Is it a better experience to not be distracted when you’re trying to concentrate?" then the answer is "Obviously, yes." But that’s too easy a question, isn’t it?

Possibly of interest:

https://news.emory.edu/stories/2019/01/er_eno_book/campus.html

"Lysaker is led to consider the different kinds of listening that “Music for Airports” requires.

Even casual music fans would be familiar with background listening, the sonic accompaniment to other activities, and with performance listening, the focus required at a concert.

Lysaker argues Eno’s willingness to use catchy musical phrases in the absence of clear rhythmic structures keeps “Music for Airports” from existing only in the background, while the lack of narrative development keeps it from serving as a showpiece.

That leaves avant-garde listening, for sounds outside of traditional configurations of melodies and scales — for sounds such as reverb — and reverie listening, in which the music initiates open-ended reflection.

Eno’s album provokes each kind of listening. Although no one can listen in all four ways at once, Eno’s deliberate engagement with each of the four creates that hazy and calm new space. 

But it also demands more than what German philosopher Theodor Adorno calls regressive listening, what we now think of as those who believe they are fully engaging with music only because it confers some kind of prestige.

“The way we often theorize listening sounds passive,” Lysaker says. “I think Eno is showing that listening is active.” 

@rvpiano -- In my case, yes. I know others who are more interested in sonic details. While I can appreciate those, I am much more interested in what the musicians might be trying to communicate, and that doesn’t come through if I’m doing puzzles or reading a book at the same time.

I, Will: SkRoLL>>> pasT

@hilde45 

Your analogy is interesting but I don’t think it really works.  We’re talking about a much more complex situation regarding SQ and music.  While it is true we listen to music and sound at the same time, It’s the priority that we give to each that’s the issue. Audiophiles tend to separate the two because of the nature of the hobby. The population at large doesn’t really care about the fine points of sound, so for them the problem seldom exists.its this separation that causes the problem in us. I believe that it’s difficult for us to ignore the sound component as a separate entity.

There are many different ways and contexts and purposes listening to music, it has many different roles - but none make me "doubt" my system...