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?
millercarbon

Showing 1 response by whart

Controversy often generates clicks. And attention. I will not pretend to "analyze" MC or his behavior toward others but will note that in an MC generated thread last night regarding the acquisition of listening skills ( think this same topic, recast in a different thread), I offered a good faith, fairly comprehensive run down on the evolution of my experience, which took account of different aspects, parts of the range from low to high, how that related to equipment I used, and the reasons my views evolved over time.
Perhaps prolix, but I identified the aspects of sound that were important at different intervals in my personal evolution based on learning, experience and seat time, including exposure to live instruments.
I suggested that one did not have to be a trained musician to know what different horns, a piano or double bass sound like and in brief, my "learning" coincided with access to new and better equipment as well as a growing interest in other facets--the technology, its history, the studio and how a particular recording was originally made. I also learned about, and started to pursue listening of entire bodies of music that were originally outside of my ken, but now, with learning, have a better understanding of the history of performance and players and where the music and performance fit into a larger picture, musically/culturally/whatever.
I think age has been kind to me. My high frequency hearing certainly isn’t what it was when I was 20 years old, but I’d like to think the compensation is that, due to a lot of years at this (devoting considerable time, energy, effort and money, among other things) , I have pretty good discernment of what I’m hearing. (Whether I like or prefer one thing to another is a different question).
My contribution, such as it was, probably did not cut any new ground, but was dismissed as "same old;" I was characterized as part of some camp (read: school of thought) here at Audiogon who made claims and should "put up or shut up." I don’t remember making any claims of any sort over the years, other than those based on my experience (or a question due to the lack of it), but I’ve been posting here since 2006.
As I think I made clear in both my original post and its follow up in the redux thread of this topic, I claimed no guruism and expressly eschewed it. There is some science to be had and I have found relevant subject matter experts, whether or not audiophiles, to help fill in the gaps in my own understanding.
But, we are in a field that is as littered with low cost consumer electronics as it is with overpriced baubles and the commercialism of some of it reeks.
Sorting through that thicket is one of the more practical aspects of embracing hobbyist audio, a subject I did not previously address. But one that I think forms the backbone of this forum-- people who are writing to figure something out because there is something they want to buy, something won’t work or some other practical question that may require more than passing familiarity with the gear in question as well as potential technical issues that may go over my head as a non-engineer.
I will say that MC can generate attention. I think he is a good writer, but so much is wasted on "gotcha’s" that it becomes a question whether to read or engage, or simply be amused. Beyond that, I will not venture. I don’t necessarily want him banned, warned or any punitive measures taken. I think all that stuff gets sorted out at a level that is not topical to this forum.
Personally, I find sparring on the Internet to be a waste on so many levels--from basic questions to the more philosophical and sometimes spirited debates over larger issues beyond a particular product or comparison of same. It is not only a waste of time/page space, but engenders ill-will.
I’m sure if I go through MC’s 10,000 posts in 2 years, I’ll find some things we’d agree on (or not). It doesn’t really matter. The question is whether good will is being fostered, or people are put off by MC.
There is no vote being taken, but I figured I am as entitled as anyone here to make these comments in view of what I’ve seen here.
May all of your listening sessions be enjoyable.
Bill Hart