Listening skills: How do you learn to listen?


Double-entendre. 


Had a few experiences lately that together were a stark reminder of something known for a long time, because I lived it myself.  

In the beginning, or at any rate going back to about 1991, I was unable to hear any difference between different CD players and DACs. Even some amplifiers, they might not sound exactly the same but I was hard pressed to say why.  

This went on for a long time. Months. Many months. Like okay a year. Whatever. During which time I was driving around hitting all the Seattle/Portland area stores listening to everything I could find. About the only difference big enough to be sure of was receivers. They for sure are crap. But even there it was hard to say exactly in what way. Just the difference there was glaring enough it was obvious this is not the way to go. But that was about it.    

All during this time of course I was reading Stereophile and studying all the reviews and building up a vocabulary of audiophile terms. The problem, seen clearly as usual only in the rear view mirror, was not really being able to match up the terminology with what I was hearing. I had words, and sounds, but without meaning, having no real link or connection between them.  

One day after yet another frustrating trip to Definitive I came home and put on my XLO Test CD and was listening to the Michael Ruff track Poor Boy when it hit me, THIS IS THAT SOUND!!!  

What sound? Good question! The better high end gear is more full and round and liquid and less etched or grainy. Poor Boy is Sheffield, all tube, and so even though being played from CD through my grainy etched mid-fi the tubey magic came through enough to trigger the elusive connection. THIS is "that sound"!  

Once triggered, this realization grew and spread real fast. In no time at all it became easy to hear differences between all kinds of things. "No time at all" was probably months, but seemed like no time at all compared to how long I was going nowhere.  

What happened? There are a near infinite number of different sonic characteristics. Attack and decay, fundamental tone, harmonic, and timbre, those were a few of the early ones I was able to get a handle on- but the list goes on and on.  

Just to go by experience, reading reviews, and talking to other audiophiles it would seem most of us spend an awful lot of time concentrating real hard on our own little list of these terms. We have our personal audiophile checklist and dutifully run down the list. The list has its uses but no matter how extensive the list becomes it always remains a tiny little blip on the infinite list of all there is.  

So what brought this to mind is recently a couple guys, several in fact, heard some of the coolest most impressive stuff I know and said....meh. Not hearing it.  

This is not a case of they prefer something else. This is not hearing any difference whatsoever. At all. None. Nada. Zip.

Like me, back in the day, with CD.  

These are not noobs either. We're talking serious, seasoned, experienced audiophiles here.

I'm not even sure it comes down to what they are listening for. Like me in '91, hard to know what you're listening for until you know what you're listening for.  

Which comes first?
128x128millercarbon

Showing 2 responses by mahgister

We listen sound with a very short conscious memory span....

It is impossible to remember a sound from few minutes ago sometimes and comparing it in our conscious usual memory with another sound on the spot...(But for sure a trained musician learn how to recognize a chord for example, but there is more to sound than tone names and timbre is not a mere addition of frequencies anyway )

But our body/soul own a memory more intimately linked to emotions which will surge anew from our body, after some past experience, if the same sound or part of it is recreated.... They are engrammed in our emotional history ready to be born again...

Then for me learning to listen was learning to spontaneously listen to my own soul/body reaction, not only to the sound with the working conscious effort to judge it....In the first case i remember or i know what the sound is by his way of living inside me... In the second case i dont remember nor can i recall either my emotion anyway...A recalled emotion is no more an emotion...An image is not the territory....

We listen with our body and not only that, we listen with all our own body histories.... It is why Alzheimer people regain part of their life with music....It is the reason why rythm is so evidently an experience of the body not of the EARS/brain only....

For me there is not "sound" at my left and "music" at my right, but only one experience....They are completely distinguished without never being separated....And learning for human living animal and soul is most of the time learning to distinguish phenomenon without separating or isolating them apart...Goethe was the great master in this art and science...




«Sound is a body's echo, like on a mountain» - A horn player from the Swiss alps

«Do you mean that your body is another mountain?»- Groucho Marx 🤓
We listened music and sound first to learn to read our own soul....This is an unconscious learning to begin with...

After that with some musical maturity we learn to consciously listen sounds and music relation itself....

The circle is then  closed...

We listened to learn and we learn to listen....

I hope to be clear , if not, my post is for once short....😁😊