What exactly is critical listening? Who does it?

Critical listening is just another aspect of critical thinking. As much as critical thinking has been disparaged as of late it's no wonder some people have this knee jerk reaction to the thought of critical listening. 

I find myself increasingly wary of those that mock critical thinking and distancing myself from them, finding myself the better for it as they are very taxing. Once removed, all their negatives come to fore.

All the best,
Nonoise

I think non-critical listening is what most people do with blue tooth speakers on the patio, Spotify on the soundbar while they are cleaning, and listening to music in the car

@ozzy62 

if you can’t get to the neutral floating ’zen’ state unless you wear headphones out on your deck in the sun, then you have work to do on your system and viewpoint.

no offense intended and i’ll bet you can get there just fine if you think about it.....or  don't think about it. :-)

there is a right time for critical listening. sometimes we need answers. especially to set up a phono cartridge, or dial in speaker or listening position placement. or many more obvious sonic questions. we need to develop the listening skills to understand what we are hearing. have good references. and no reason not to enjoy that part. it's part of the hobby and system development.

but we also need to be able to get away from that type listening and just let the music happen and disconnect too.

@mikelavigne 

I am in for what you wrote above. There is a time for Critical listening and a time for just relax and enjoy, knowing that what you hear is the best you can get out of for system. 

Anyone here practice meditation like mindfulness. If you nearly empty your mind and experience music... well, that is the opposite of critical listening. That is experiencing music. 

So, with that as a baseline, critical listening can be concentrating ones minds on the performance or the system. 

Critical thinking and analytical thinking are being conflated here. I like the analogy to critical thinking, this should be a stimulating, intense exercise. Lets think about a critique, a critique doesn't have to be judgemental, it can be simple appreciation. That's how I listen during my relatively long listening sessions, I'm simply appreciating both the performance of musicians and the qualities of sound from both the recording and my system. 

Now analysis is when one enters the judgemental mode. we are intentionally analyzing both the performance and sound quality, Analysis is inherently comparative as we  need to have some reference for this analysis. This is the mode of listening which finds fault, cognitive dissonance and unhappiness easily arise here. 

As for listening for sheer musical enjoyment, I only go here with far lesser audio systems where I need to avoid listening to sound quality since it would only cause unhappiness. 

I too don't understand this seemingly increasing dismissiveness or negative connotations  towards the critical. To engage in critical thinking or listening should be a highly stimulating, enjoyable, consciousness and curiosity raising activity. 

@sns I like the distinction you make between critical thinking and analytical thinking.

The idea that a critique can be "simple appreciation" is a tricky concept. To my understanding, "critique" involves at least two layers of experience, both the very simple *having* of the experience (resonating with the music) and the more reflective secondary *reflection* about the experience.

So, critique is multi-layered and this is not what some want in their listening. They want to just "enjoy the music" and that means *not* reflecting on it ("appreciating it" as you put it). This is why it’s conflated with "analytical thinking" which is thinking put to a purpose -- judgment about better and worse.

That said, one can understand the conflation, no? After all, appreciation is also (at least implicitly), depending on a comparative. To say, "Ah, now that’s really nice" is to imply that it’s "nicer than usual" which is comparative.

Personally, I cannot just immerse in music in a one-level way -- mere resonating. I move between that kind of immersion and the other, appreciation-listening. Still, going that additional step, to analytical thinking, can be hard to keep at bay, for me.

A critique may state the issue, analysis attends to the issue. 

My biggest issue is with the claim listening purely for the music is the highest/best mode or goal of the audiophile. How can this be when the very essence of this hobby/obsession is sound quality. So now we're supposed to ignore sound quality and transcend into this blissful world where sound quality is of no consequence. There must be something seriously wrong with the sound quality of one's system if listening to it causes stress, discomfort. 

The critical state of listening is a state where appreciation for the music, the performance of the artists, sound quality of system and recording all go hand in hand. I simply can't divorce myself from all these things when listening to my system. To appreciate all these things, and all simultaneously has always been my goal, why would I want to turn away from any of it!

And appreciation isn't necessarily an affirmation that everything is well. One can appreciate that poor recordings sound poorly, mid grade recordings have flaws, one can also appreciate that one's system may not be where one would like it. Tue critical state of listening is a mindful state where one recognizes all these imperfections yet accepts them on their own terms. I'm not going to bang my head against the wall constantly with the wrongheaded notion I'm not going to or I can't tolerate imperfection and flaws. 

Certainly for most of us there eventually becomes a time when certain flaws cannot be ignored or intolerable. Recording flaws are beyond our control so we focus on system flaws, certainly critical listening has uncovered or exposed these flaws, we then enter the analytical state  where analysis of these flaws and the means to repair them are formulated. Analysis is the locus for the vast majority of stress we feel comes from, often we can't determine exactly where these flaws coming from, upgrades and churning of equipment ensues. And this doesn't solve all the issues, so we go on to another cycle of upgrades and churning, far too many circles being traveled, faulty analysis the cause. 

@emergingsoul , once you told us that back when you were in the 1st grade you were fascinated by clean power and how it affected your system and how you would sneak away at recess and go to the local audio-shops to evaluate the latest power conditioners.  What type of listening did you do when you were making these evaluations?

i know for myself personally i find the deepest most meaningful feedback about where my system is from non-critical listening.....where i am just listening without any specific agenda. it’s when the full wonder of the music seems to happen

As far as I am concerned, @mikelavigne nailed it.

I don’t trust anything I think I hear when I focus on gear and system. I take mental notes, just in case, but sound quality insights aren’t real until they bubble to the surface at the detour of a piece of music I particularly enjoy, when my mind is lost a world away from equipment. If they do, when they do, then I know I can trust them.

@immatthewj 

Thank you for the remembrance. In my early years I was a huge rap fan. Critical listening was very important in my early formation years.

Since my early years analyzing the merits of rap, I have moved on.  

I've learned that satisfaction in the pleasures of life is elusive and rarely achieved if not for just a brief period of time.  We endure frustration and disappointment very often in our lives.  No matter how good it gets, sadness is ever present. 

Have a nice day.

Since my early years analyzing the merits of rap, I have moved on.  

I bet that took at least five minutes.......

critical listening is something I must do in the process of audio restoration of old damaged recordings. I must be sensitive to various audio anomalies common in older audio recordings. above all, my restoration results must seem nominally "musical" to the average ear. that means, in effect, "no shriek or boom" unless it is in the recording itself.

It’s clear to me the engineers involved when recording and mixing the end musical product as well as those people involved in the transmission of sound through the various Data pipes to our homes for Home Theater streaming purposes at times may not be fully in touch with what critical listening means

It’s very clear that Home theater streaming sound quality is substantially less than it should be and should significantly be improved but for some reason critical listening is not resulted in any effort to achieve this.  .

My biggest issue is with the claim listening purely for the music is the highest/best mode or goal of the audiophile. How can this be when the very essence of this hobby/obsession is sound quality. So now we’re supposed to ignore sound quality and transcend into this blissful world where sound quality is of no consequence. There must be something seriously wrong with the sound quality of one’s system if listening to it causes stress, discomfort. 

@sns 

critical listening is a tool. not the goal.

in 2004 i built a dedicated room, professionally designed, with lots of built in diffusion. it took me 11 more years and lots of effort to get the room and system to where i was satisfied in 2015. the process involved lots of critical listening. but even through that process, there was plenty of times when i just sat down to listen to music and had no change or issue that i was thinking about. many times during these casual listening sessions, things would come to mind, or i would hear something, to think about. and the process of letting the music speak to me first, and not being in that critical mind set, yielded the most profound results. i came to trust all my senses to guide me. i learned to trust how i was feeling. and not just my conscious mind about what i was listening to. even to the point of realizing i was not in the mood to listen. i needed to go do something else to get to the right headspace.

everyone is different. but this is what worked for me.

if i am in a very aggressive critical listening mode, where i have a specific thing i’m investigating, i tell my wife not to disturb me. i need to concentrate fully to get to the bottom of something. so there are degrees of critical listening, and it’s a learned thing. and i respect it, and it can be very satisfying too. i’m not anti-critical listening.

and any time i'm listening my spidey sense is activated to recognize some audible niggle that needs attention. i am sensitive to how things should sound and am in touch with my left brain enough to be aware. but i'm not actually actively listening for something that may or may not be there and i don't want my brain power to be used for that. i trust my experience to manage it.

now i’m retired, my system building time is over for now, and there are few reasons now to listen critically. but say, i downsize and need to set up a new room. then i’ll have to travel down that same road again.

When the motor is purring, nothing else much matters. People quit talking and just listen.

That was a helpful clarification ("critique" vs. "analysis").

My biggest issue is with the claim listening purely for the music is the highest/best mode or goal of the audiophile. How can this be when the very essence of this hobby/obsession is sound quality.  So now we're supposed to ignore sound quality and transcend into this blissful world where sound quality is of no consequence. 

I agree 100%. Such statements seem like ways to avoid analysis. Then again, there's someone who has not dodged analysis, Mike Lavigne who says,

"critical listening is a tool. not the goal."

Mike's post laid out in nice detail the iterative back and forth which brought his system to a happy state of completion. Now, I don't know how you take his comment, in its wider context.  I, for one, would not have put it as definitively ("the" goal). After all, there is positive enjoyment of sound as well as of musical content.

So, one counterargument to the music-first is roughly that: viz.,  sound-is-a-positive-good-too.

Another route is what we might call the "sound and music are inseparable" argument. Your comment about having multiple elements go hand and hand speakes to that. 

(Consider someone enjoying the juicy-sweet-crunchy taste of an apple. If I said  "Ok, but aren't apples really about the crunch?" they would look at me as if I didn't understand what it means to eat an apple. To me, your comment conveys that kind of point.)

True critical state of listening is a mindful state where one recognizes all these imperfections yet accepts them on their own terms. 

Agreed. Think of the difference between a perfectly symmetrical beautiful face and one which is beautiful but interesting, asymmetrical. Hawthorne got to the heart of the falsity of perfection with his short story, "The Birthmark." 

Certainly for most of us there eventually becomes a time when certain flaws cannot be ignored or intolerable. 

This happened to me when I started listening to a much higher percentage of symphonic music. The flaws (or shortcomings) were now too pronounced in the speakers and I needed to make a change.

I'd add one other point which might give a bit more room for the "listen to the music argument." There are times I get lost in the music because of its (let's say "semantic") content. This is akin to watching a movie and forgetting you're watching a rectangular screen, or reading a novel with a certain size and type of font. The goal of "getting lost in the music" is, on this interpretation, about forgetting the media (even the pleasurable aspects of that media) and letting the semantic content completely suffuse your experience. That kind of consummatory experience is one we all have and which is a legitimate goal. But -- here I return to your point above -- it's not a "superior" goal or the "only" goal. 

Critical listening is done by critics.  

Sound vs music or is it sound and music. Sound vs music means are we most focused on the either the sound or music, sometimes the sound  most stimulates our senses other times the music. What is most salient vacillates at times for me, responsibility for this may be assigned to the recording, the music, the performance of that music or the system itself. The sound quality of the recording may detract or enhance  the music itself, obviously this can be a good or bad thing. 

Sound and music not in conflict or opposition. We could be 'lost' in the music, sound recedes into the subconscious. We could also become 'lost' in the sound, music recedes into the subconscious. And then there is the happy medium where sound and music become one, we are not consciously aware of the difference. 

People often report being more easily seduced into just listening to music on low end systems, there is no conflict since we simply ignore the sound. This much more difficult with high end systems in which sound may become of paramount importance. How can we not be focused on sound with all that we've invested into sound! I'd suggest we're nearly always conscious of the sound of our system, especially when we are admiring the sound reproduced by our systems.

So the question becomes, is consciousness of sound considered a critical state of listening whereas lack of consciousness of it is not? Is listening to the sound inferior to listening to the music? Is consciousness of all these things a negative or critical state of listening? Is transcendence or suspension of consciousness considered to be the highest form or goal of listening to music reproduction on a high end system? I'd suggest setting and propagating this as a goal is a disservice to the audiophile community, this invites discontent by setting a nearly impossible goal. 

Why are there so many Long comments posted that just meander all over the place.  I guess humans are critical about everything.

@emergingsoul Absolutely, perhaps audiophiles by nature are more critical than the average person. Who the hell cares about sound quality anyway, really pretty silly in the whole scheme of things.

it's very important to be silly and obsessive and escape into our hobby madness. let go. find your happy place. just don't take yourself too seriously.

@mikelavigne  So true.

it's very important to be silly and obsessive and escape into our hobby madness. let go. find your happy place. just don't take yourself too seriously. 

Is transcendence or suspension of consciousness considered to be the highest form or goal of listening to music reproduction on a high end system? I’d suggest setting and propagating this as a goal is a disservice to the audiophile community, this invites discontent by setting a nearly impossible goal. 

100% agree with your statement, not only because it invites discontent, but also because it is merely posited as the supreme goal, without justification. Let 1000 goals bloom!

Who the hell cares about sound quality anyway, really pretty silly in the whole scheme of things

Of course, in the moral scheme of things, this is true. But it’s very hard to care half-way about something we love. I’m in Siena right now and people here are NUTS for the Palio. Their whole being is wrapped up in it. To me, it seems like collective lunacy -- but then I think, "This is who they are, to themselves. This is their identity."

What I like about audiophiles is their ability to care so much about the fabric of what makes life enjoyable. I like the fact that they’re "serious" about it, that they care enough to debate and argue (with civility, of course). Would mindless scrolling on a phone be better? 

This is not a vocation or a moral mission, but it is a serious hobby, with real stakes, and profound payoffs. 

 

i know for myself personally i find the deepest most meaningful feedback about where my system is from non-critical listening.....where i am just listening without any specific agenda. it’s when the full wonder of the music seems to happen. where the music is driving my mind, not any mental baggage i’ve brought to the session.

how is the music making me feel? 

@mikelavigne Strong points here. I would add that “listening modes” are based on what we experience - a balance of what we hear or perceive we hear, and how it makes us think and feel. In my personal observation, if I am not hearing certain things about the music and it does not fulfill me emotionally, it DOES become a distraction, and I think and listen critically to understand how to address it. This is probably similar to what you explain, in your whole post above, but I know I’m not alone for being a critical listener at times for the reason of wanting to address a challenge in the system’s presentation such that it makes me feel more fulfilled. Not feeling right about the presentation or performance can be the biggest distraction of all, especially if one is fully aware of what is missing!

One thing I found is that depending on the characteristics of your system it can draw you in to critically listen or to experience. Highly detailed system with pronounced slam pull the focus of your mind to what you have not heard before or specific sounds through their highly detailed character... or their stark imaging. They pull at your analytical side.

Musical systems draw in your emotional side and turn off your analytical side. These soothe your soul. This is why most folks pursue high end audio systems, but often get lost on the analytical side while evaluation and choosing systems. You can end up, like I did at one point, having and incredibly detailed system that would highlight the mastering and venue. While I would get excited by all the great sounds I was hearing, I would get bored listening in 45 minutes. 

If you are interested, when your are at a dealer with an Audio Research I/50 or the new I/70 integrated amp and some non analytical speakers. Sit and listen to some music. Don't consider buying... just experience it.  It is the most commonly available warm really musical amp. For me, my eyes close and I instantly get lost in the music and couldn’t care less about the speakers or the electronics... the emotional connection is instant and deep for me. 

It is at first impression a matter of semantics. Critical can obviously mean at least two things - one connotes negativity - ie a person being critical points out negative facts, [their] observations, or perceptions from a real or supposed (usually subjective) ideal.

The second meaning/use is a variance from an objective standard. Ie. a business plan or financial investment analysis requires a critical review of all known variables, and some accounting/adjustment for unknown future impacts. All engineering and design requires critical review for many reasons.

Socrates was attributed with saying "an unexamined life is not worth living". Meaning (I think) that all people should consider how to examine and improve themselves (physically, emotionally, educationally, financially, spiritually, etc.) - to at least be working a little over time toward becoming a ’better’ version of themselves in their roles as father, employee, neighbor, mentor, professional, etc.

I don’t think of critical listening as having any ’negative’ connotations. I will choose [when] to notice detail, soundstage, tone, emotion of the singer or music, fidelity, warmth, yada yada. I can listen to music in the car or home completely as background music, but I can also listen ’critically’ - and remember how the song ’felt’ when I heard it live in a concert as a teenager, and how it sounds now on a personally curated hifi system.  All good. It becomes ’negative critical listening’ when a) you can’t appreciate any level of the playback for what it is, and create some ’comparison’ in your mind when you hear playback that is cognitively dissonant from what you think it should be, or usually worse, a sound or experience that is out of financial reach. Comparison or 'criticality' in that sense chases that mythical dragon of some satisfaction that is unachievable - in the comparison mindset. Like Einstein said "we cannot solve the problems with find ourselves in, with the same type of thinking that created them". 

I see a couple of situations where I use critical listening - extensively when purchasing new components and again during set up in my home listening area. 

For me the most important thing is to have a set of 6 or so musical tracks that I know very well, and that represent the different parts of the audio spectrum. Bring with or have AD stream, so that you can listen for reproducible instruments/sounds from the component being auditioned. Same thing when setting up a listening area (moving things around, adding a new component). 
 

Critical listening for me evolved into musical enjoyment once things are just right. 
 

At one time I had this romantic system, totally drawn to the music, and then at some point I became aware I was only listening to certain types or recordings. This probably went on for a year or so prior to this awareness. So I started listening to a wider range of recordings, the defects and flaws that had been there all along suddenly became salient and I could never NOT hear those flaws from that point on. Point is I had subconsciously stopped listening critically, had a wonderful time while it lasted. 

So that system goes bye bye, build the next system only to satisfy my critical listening mode. This goes on for some time until I come to realize this system not emotionally engaging, this system then goes bye bye.

So now I've been to both ends of the scale, ever since that realization I've finally been able to build a system that engages me from the critical, analytical and emotional states or perspectives. When you finally experience engagement or appreciation for all three states of consciousness you find contentment. I purposely seek engagement on all three levels, never want to go back to the need to ignore some listening perspective or avoid conscious, aka critical listening. 

If a system is utterly musical and pleasing to my ears, I don’t think how it sounds. We keep thinking about its sound (critical listening) because the system is not musical and unpleasant to our ears and it became an object.

Can you think about how it sound when you listen below music which, I think, is more musical than the original music?  Alex/Wavetouch audio

Eric Clapton - Tears in heaven

Original music 

I agree with @ozzy62’s comment concerning “critical listening” could mean something different to each individual.  For me, critical listening is when I am simply listening to minute details in the music to see if a new product I am auditioning is improving the sound quality.  I’m critical listening so I can make a decision on a product I’m contemplating on buying.  I imagine most of us would do that before we spend money on our gear, if we have an opportunity to audition a product.  So, 99% of the time, I’m NOT critical listening, but enjoying the music because I finally got my system dialed in and I have no desire to audition or replace anything.  That’s what critical listening means to me,

@mihorn I don't get how you'd NOT appreciate and/or listen to the sound of your system if it's pleasing to the ear. For instance I cannot listen to my system without marveling at the way performers are presented with these uncanny three dimensional  life size images on these utterly unique sound stages that individual recordings offer up. And I could go on and on about timbre, tonality, resolution, transparency, etc, etc. The sound and music go hand in hand, heightened sound quality brings the performers into the room and make it all the more believable. I spent decades pursuing this sound and now I'm supposed to look past it or ignore it! 

I still don't get the idea that listening to the sound is a critical/bad thing when listening to high end systems. I purposely didn't listen critically with lesser systems because it exposed flaws in sound, minus the flaws one should desire to have at least some consciousness in regard to sound, the sound is in service to the music and performers.

OP, only you can decide if you want to do critical listening--if so, when and why.

I’ve done a lot of it, specifically:

• When I’m writing a review of a headphone, amp or DAC (to post on an audio board ... not a professional reviewer)
• When I’m writing descriptions of the sound of a given DAC, preamp, amp, pair of speakers
• When I get a new (or new-to-me used) component and first hear it in my system
• Or when I hear someone else’s system/equipment

Critical listening is an entirely different mindset from casual or enjoyment listening--the kind I do most often. Critical listening requires less emotion and more analysis, ie, What exactly am I hearing? How can I describe what I’m hearing in words someone else can understand?

Critical listening isn’t fun, but sometimes it’s necessary. And one’s hearing, like any other brain activity, can be practiced and improved, resulting in more focus and awareness of what is being perceived. For example, time spent listening critically helps me indirectly (yet significantly) when I listen to unfamiliar music and try to put it in the perspective of music known to me (perhaps beloved by me). It could be a jazz cut or a classical performance. There’s a halo effect with critical listening, at least for me; sometimes it helps even when I’m not consciously listening critically.

So I'm really having trouble with what exactly is the definition of critical listening, this what OP asked in original post.

Some state that listening to the sound of one's system is critical listening, this inferior to a mode where one transcends the sound of their system  and/or eliminates consciousness of it's sound quality or qualities. 

So, my question is why is this a superior mode of listening, what makes it inherently superior? And why is consciousness of sound quality or qualities necessarily a critical mode of listening? And then we have the music and the performance of that music, is there not some level of critical listening in that?  We all have favorite artists, genres of music , favored performances of that music. So somehow we magically escape critical listening when we just listen to the music, some magical spell transports us to this world of no judgment, comparison, consciousness. 

My take is whenever we are listening INTENTLY  to music reproduced over high end systems we are inherently in critical listening mode, this applicable to the music, performance of that music and the sound quality or qualities of our systems. I assume we all got into high end audio in order to more realistically present music in our home environment, we wish to feel a closer connection to the artists and their performance of music, this requires critical attention being paid. Casual listening on the other hand is not critical listening, our attention is diverted to other things. Critical listening is listening with full attention, is not necessarily judgmental or doesn't have to be judgemental. Critical listening is listening with heightened senses, this is not a bad thing. 

I always listen critically because I want to know what the system is doing well, what could use improvement, and maybe most importantly, what the engineer is trying to convey (and maybe not convey?).

I want to hear all those small changes that would go unnoticed to most.

I want to hear the engineer "touch" the pan pot.

When a singer doubles their voice, barely audibly, in the background, I want to be able to hear that for what it is, and where it is.

On overdubs, I want to hear the "punch in" when it occurs.

I want to hear the buzz of the amps from the performance, though I could do without the snare rattle.

I want to hear when the noise gate opens and closes.

I want to hear the "easter eggs" many of which will never be picked up through casual listening on a lesser system.

The list goes on, but these are the things that I find enjoyable and keep the music fresh and most are only picked up through critical listening.

BTW, if it matters, I am a retired consultant/scientist who specialized in noise and air quality studies for CEQA compliance.

Critical listening is the gateway to whatever is there on the other side of the fence.

Of course I’m going to critically evaluate components that I’m spending decent money on, and then when it comes through the door I’m gonna be very critical to ensure it does everything I was hoping for.

I’m gonna listen to all kinds of music that I’m familiar with critically evaluating the changes and hope to be hearing with a new purchase.

When I was younger, I never had the awareness to listen very very carefully however I was very mindful of how well music filled the room vs crappier systems which were disappointing.  

I think you can balance critical listening and other types of enjoyment at the same time.  Unfortunately, we all have an instilled discipline within us that prevents us from avoiding this ongoing critique of everything we do and see. 

Presently, I’m done buying all this audio stuff aside from potentially upgrading speakers. So the critical side of the mission is fading away, thankfully.  Maybe I have to buy a car and I have to now critically evaluate all the new electronics and stupid digitized Dashboard which is horrifying, I don’t like a having an iPad embedded in the dashboard. 

I'd suggest critical listening can be broken down into two sub modes, one judgemental, the other not. Judgmental mode is for evaluation, listening to sound quality, qualities in order to compare, contrast to some reference.  The other mode of critical listening is intentionally careful listening which should bring about a sense of heightened consciousness in which music, artistic performance and sound quality, qualities all serve to maintain undivided attention to this single activity of listening to music on a high end system. Music, artistic performance and sound quality should all have great salience such there should be a conscious acknowledgment and appreciation for each.

When I was younger, I never had the awareness to listen very very carefully however I was very mindful of how well music filled the room vs crappier systems which were disappointing.  

By 'younger', are you referring to your days in the first grade when you were checking out different power conditioners?

@immatthewj 

way earlier.

For me, critical listening changes future listening. It improves apprehension, enlarges vision, refines discrimination, and creates new standards. Music gives me the object full of meaning; listening critically involves grasping potentialities in that object which were unseen. Subsequent experiences of listening are thicker, richer. 

In other words, listening is not just a mere medium for emotion. My ability to listen, critically, helps me discriminate among goods. And as soon as I begin to compare such goods -- this singer sounds more detailed, that soundstage is more realistically presented, that bassoon sound richer and full of character, etc. --  I am doing criticism. 

Criticism requires inquiry into the conditions and consequences of the outcome valued. It is needed to enhance perception and to allow for appreciation of the same thing over time. Again, it accomplishes this by uncovering new meanings. Criticism is the path from "merely enjoying" something to enjoying it as reflectively validated.

Criticism allows me to choose more knowingly because it reveals the conditions and consequences involved. It also makes it possible to express my likings in an informed way. Criticism is the main reason an audio forum, even the hobby, can exist at all.

@westborn Regarding Socrates, here’s my take. It’s a common misreading to think that Socrates’ claim that "the unexamined life is not worth living" is about "self-improvement," generally. It's not really "be all that you can be," in our modern self-help sense; rather, it’s actually deeply intertwined with his view that "It is better to be dead than wicked."

An unexamined life is one where someone passively accepts societal norms, desires, and opinions without critical reflection. They don't "think about stuff," crudely, but more specifically, they don't think about values -- what is honesty or courage or compassion. They either ignore the world around them or just say "whatever" or even, "everyone is different." Meanwhile, they become increasingly  ignorant about what is really good or evil -- and so become vulnerable to acting (or passively accepting) what is morally wrong. They "turn a blind eye" to the pain and suffering around them, and their possible complicity in that suffering.

In other words, the ignorant person -- the one living an unexamined life -- either tolerates or passively allows evil acts. This is a form of self-harm, in Socrates’ view, as it harms their most valuable possession: their character (or soul, in his Greek version).

Socrates thought that  our moral integrity was paramount, far surpassing physical life or material possessions. To live in an unexamined way, then, is to become vulnerable to wickedness, and this inflicts the greatest possible damage  on oneself.