Listening Skills Part Duex: What are you listening for?


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 4 responses by has2be

Tone and timbre...
Past that the quality of the recording has as much ado as the quality of the design in the circuits you choose. Over analizing anything music related defeats the purpose of listening to music. Your describing listening to equipment.
No one hears the same, or listens for the same pleasure cues ,in fact as individuals our hearing changes daily from chemical stresses and agitations and well being. Three seasoned audiophiles say meh... you say yay...why assume its them and not you thats not " hearing" it...in what they are "hearing" at the time... maybe it's you thats missing something bigger than the individualistic focus... maybe...
Have you ever considered outside your unfamiliarity, that these things are not Unfamiliar to Others at all...they just don't matter with the impact they seem to hold over you. Doesn't mean it makes us the unwashed and slightly dazed...
Yes mapman, YMMV... it is that simple... for those of us that grasp Yours meaning an individual singularity ..
By simply listening to music for years and decades . Through those times from beginnings as gear evolved and it comes naturally. Its not forced or strained or fretted over. It's not some rare gift . Its memory like a reflex. Like anything it comes from experience like a good mechanic tuning a car. He knows the sound. Measurements only confirm his experience of auditory memory . If its such an importance to you to and you think there is some great skill set ... instead of passing your usual judgements, just stand and deliver it. Make your claim and expose yourself.
Most just listen with enjoyment in mind . The new characteristics expose themselves against an imbeded memory like a mothers voice. Something known to measure against.
We learn it in communicating the subtle changes in a voice
for joy and anger etc. So kind of out of the womb in way actually , yes. How much you wish to focus and interpret is purely an individual thing.

Now what about a gramophone.....
 https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rowan+atkinson+selling+stereos&view=detail&mid=AC3444C6...
Hmmmm......so you put your spin on what others " seem to be saying" but in your own words not ours thus making it your interpretation of our , us... as simple.
Hearing , or listening as is the case , is not a simplistic action. Its quite complex. The simple truth here, is your missing the point in projecting yourself into others thoughts and opinions that a state of calm with no pre determined or pre conceived reason or outcome other than listening  for enjoyment can't give the same learned results over time . You may focus all you want and pretend to be able to only hear those "critical" listening points...but like it or not your ears and brain are hearing it all and storing it away. Perhaps some of you need to over focus on less of whats going on because your unable to filter things out and retrieve them without doing so. Perception..yes..so whats being missed while focus is narrowed away from the broad picture and how those other things correlate.
Interesting how knowledge is brought up as if to remind us you have it and perception or rather assumption is perceived we don't. As far as the wine thing goes, so your easily influenced to what others think you should do for how  their own experience works. Someone else could tell you a wholly different focus ...someone else might "simply" be able to see the totality of the whole experience.  I'm not a wine drinker personally, so I can't comment myself 
See, its very easy to minimize others isn't it. We all have our own way , the fact some of us have no need to over analyze and singularly focus on fine details doesn't mean we don't hear or know them. Some here, (OP) think the terminology of words is king to knowledge to know what your looking for. To others, we 'simple' think you need to of heard it to know what  it is your looking for, or , what we have have heard for reference in our grey archives. 
I respectfully and emphatically agree to disagree...enjoyment is a simple thing that complicating it erodes its very nature and beauty .
Your conflating two separate experiences as if one because of a simplistic approach doesn't have the same  complex action behind it right there to retrieve. Maybe some of you just can't do it in a relaxed state without a conscious filter and hyper focus ... sounds difficult and flawed ... like studying for a test vs experience and fun learning.
One you use often the other usually not. Perhaps its the added pressure self applied that usually adds the need to  bring up knowledge and self worth... It's ridiculous to assume one knows what another should hear and interpret let alone thinking the singular path to get there is the only road to how everyone else  should interpret and interact to and in their own environment . Suggestions, some ignore needing their own way , some use it as a starting point, others follow it blindly nodding away , some use it as if being the authority on it. Good teachers always allow the learning a path or interest they connect and relate it to , not a rigid this way only I know attitude.

 Some, post a question already having their own answer not wanting anyones input at all unless it aligns with theirs for confirmation and ego...research it... it's been posted already. 

Regardless music is the simple reason this exists. Enjoyment and stress removal is the simple reason we stay engaged. Listening is the basic  requirement for it.
Learning through memory and observation is a bonus.
Thinking you can't do both at the same time is sad . Assuming what you label as a simple approach is less knowledgeable is flawed and arrogant in my view. You think we don't read and have subtle feelers going on in our conscious and subconscious while enjoying listening... 
Your experience is yours..not mine . I can except that without reducing it. In kind without agenda is also a simple approach to things  ..as is in kind as in the first thread. It got back what it had gotten through memory over time ..simple...yes...