It's a trite and commonplace observation that audiophiles often listen to gear rather than music. I was thinking about what that means, and this analogy occurred to me - if you've ever taken a class in drawing or painting, someone has surely tried to teach you to "see for drawing." It's a very different way of looking at the world, focusing on lines, angles, shadows, and so on rather than the objects and scenes that information conveys through our perceptual system. It's hard to learn, and for the non-expert, hard to sustain. But it seems that when listening to audio systems reproducing music, it's much easier to fall into an analogous way of listening - focusing on the shimmer of the highs, the space between the instruments, and so on, rather than the musical objects and scenes. When non-audiophiles "don't get it" - a frequent complaint on online forums - I think it's often just that they have, perhaps to their good fortune, never happened to hit on that way of listening. I think that most of the people here at least implicitly get the distinction between these modes of listening, and move between them at will, but I think a lot of the most vehement "audiophiles" on the internet are stuck in the audio equivalent of "seeing for drawing." Your thoughts?
A speculation about how audiophiles listen
- Thread starter RichPA
- Start date
Catcher10
Senior Member
I think this may be more true for those audiophiles that are in constant change with their gear, not so much fiddling but trading, exchanging or buying new gear. I feel comfortable in saying that most new gear, post 2000's is pretty good technology, post 2010 seems like even better. Compared to the gear I owned when I was in my teens and early 20-30's. There is for sure much more detail coming out of my gear than ever before, especially on the analog end.
I am listening to music more that I ever have been of the past 10yrs, because the gear is very good. I do hear much more dynamics, detail, intricacies than ever before, and this mainly from recordings of the 70's.
If you are always changing gear, how can you give yourself a chance to hear the music and all its layers? Or always be concerned if you are squeezing every bit out and always tweaking. I think we all would agree.....Sit and listen to your music, it will make you happy I am sure!
Not sure I care if the Mona Lisa is smiling or not or is female or male, it's a cool painting just looking at it.
I am listening to music more that I ever have been of the past 10yrs, because the gear is very good. I do hear much more dynamics, detail, intricacies than ever before, and this mainly from recordings of the 70's.
If you are always changing gear, how can you give yourself a chance to hear the music and all its layers? Or always be concerned if you are squeezing every bit out and always tweaking. I think we all would agree.....Sit and listen to your music, it will make you happy I am sure!
Not sure I care if the Mona Lisa is smiling or not or is female or male, it's a cool painting just looking at it.
David
Moderator
I think I've become something of an audio snob though. I can't stand sheety sounding stuff anymore. I'd rather enjoy the silence.
This has happened to my wife too. She's just started working at a hair salon and is complaining the music they play is on some crap stuff and the sound is driving her nuts. I fully understand her. She wants to take our AR-3a to the shop. I'm not sure about that lol
This has happened to my wife too. She's just started working at a hair salon and is complaining the music they play is on some crap stuff and the sound is driving her nuts. I fully understand her. She wants to take our AR-3a to the shop. I'm not sure about that lol
This topic reminded me of an article Mike sent me about how to listen. I have started a thread about there article here: http://www.audiohaven.org/forum/main-forum/8131-how-to-listen this should add to this discussion but can be its own topic so I posted it separately.
So back the this thread and my comments. I listen in many ways. Background music when I am working such as that remote controlled, plastic boom box in the garage playing WXPN when the car work gets done. Background CDP with a few loaded to spin when I'm melting solder on the workbench/dining room table. Loud music playing through the house when I peck on the keyboard. Music that is the focus of my attention. Music that is played for a collective to enjoy when folks drop by for a listen or the music that is played to find fault in the system. I'm glad I got to list the last one last as it is less important now. I guess the main rig is decent enough for me to enjoy its output in many different ways whether it is background, soft, loud or critical listening.
I'm sure not an audiophile, by definition, when I'm enjoying the garage rig but I appreciate the music. The car and home systems are much better and those are enjoyed on a regular basis. Now more for music enjoyment than equipment evaluation.
So back the this thread and my comments. I listen in many ways. Background music when I am working such as that remote controlled, plastic boom box in the garage playing WXPN when the car work gets done. Background CDP with a few loaded to spin when I'm melting solder on the workbench/dining room table. Loud music playing through the house when I peck on the keyboard. Music that is the focus of my attention. Music that is played for a collective to enjoy when folks drop by for a listen or the music that is played to find fault in the system. I'm glad I got to list the last one last as it is less important now. I guess the main rig is decent enough for me to enjoy its output in many different ways whether it is background, soft, loud or critical listening.
I'm sure not an audiophile, by definition, when I'm enjoying the garage rig but I appreciate the music. The car and home systems are much better and those are enjoyed on a regular basis. Now more for music enjoyment than equipment evaluation.
Rich, that's a great analogy about art lessons and to our good fortune, being able to move between the modes of listening. I was talking to my wife who is a good artist in her own right but who also took additional art lessons a few years ago. The instructor asked the class to recreate a picture of a Buddah which was displayed upside down. Draw what you see, rather than what you think it should look like. The results were amazing. When her drawing was turned right side up, there was the picture, well done.
There's nothing wrong with listening for the individual timbre, timing, dynamics. The better the individual pieces are, the better the entire picture. To be blessed with ability to listen to the detailed pieces AND/OR keep your toe tapping and head swinging while forgetting about the troubles of the day...well that's just wonderful!!
There's nothing wrong with listening for the individual timbre, timing, dynamics. The better the individual pieces are, the better the entire picture. To be blessed with ability to listen to the detailed pieces AND/OR keep your toe tapping and head swinging while forgetting about the troubles of the day...well that's just wonderful!!
Picture the musicians - rock, jazz, classical, blues, whatever genres you prefer - on the other side of a large window. To me, everything that is in the recording and playback chains will lessen the clarity of that window in some way and to some degree.
We tend to choose recordings that faithfully capture the performance, and the soul of the performers.
We then choose equipment that provides each of us with our perception of the clearest, cleanest window in accordance with our expectations for that setting.
That, IMHO, is why we can be so demanding in one setting (home) and still enjoy music through clearly inferior equipment in other settings (car, etc.).
Just my $.02.....YMMV.
We tend to choose recordings that faithfully capture the performance, and the soul of the performers.
We then choose equipment that provides each of us with our perception of the clearest, cleanest window in accordance with our expectations for that setting.
That, IMHO, is why we can be so demanding in one setting (home) and still enjoy music through clearly inferior equipment in other settings (car, etc.).
Just my $.02.....YMMV.
slippers-on
Active Member
Great discussion! For me, Its to easy to listen to how dynamic a instrumentalist is with his ax. But I believe it takes one a while to learn to listen to the song as a whole to really enjoy what is being conveyed. I like to look at song titles and sit and listen to the way the musician (s) convey the title through the music as a whole. What got me listening to music in such a way, happened back in the late 70's and early 80's when I was a huge pot smoker. I could never understand avant-garde music or free jazz until I lit one up. I could then focus on the music as a whole...I could then understand what the musicians where trying to convey. That was how I learned to "focus on the Forrest rather than the individual trees". Well, I left the influence of the good weed long time ago in the 80's with the ability to listen to music as a whole rather than individual parts. Its way more fun to get the idea of a entire musical performance rather than listening and saying "wow did you hear that screaming sax?" No.. for me.......fit the screaming sax within the frame work of the entire musical performance and you'll find your self on a musical adventure or journey.
Juncers;n8189 said:
Ahhh.....good old mono recordings.
You are absolutely correct that some of the finest recordings - performance and quality - are those wonderful mono records that many pass over.
My mono records sound simply wonderful on my systems.
I owe it to them to set up a dedicated mono system, with proper mono cartridge, someday soon.
mono jazz recordings have proven similar to me. I don't(yet) have a dedicated mono setup, but still, the recording quality in some of the old mono issues is such that the output has a space and definition of instruments that is very nice. Plus, sometimes the sheer brilliance of the music, for me, overwhelms details around quality of playback, condition of recording or even quality of the original production. I can think of one live record of various be-bop greats playing in Massey Hall in Toronto. It was a radio broadcast, and the recording quality was close to abyssmal. Still, the brilliance of the artists on stage those nights is stunning, and for me at least, outweighs the technical shortcomings in the recording(which was made when I was about 2 years old, as I recall).
slippers-on
Active Member
David....no more of the good weed for this cat! I've been drug and booze free from the 80's. No desire, Haven't had a drop of anything stronger than coffee! But trust me....If I had a $1 for every joint I lit up, I would be able to buy me a nice Tenor Integrated amp and a pair of Canton Reference 1 K's
TJLitt.....perhaps they'd finally hear the music and not the gear?
TJLitt.....perhaps they'd finally hear the music and not the gear?
David
Moderator
slippers-on so where ya spent all that cash you would have spent on joints??? 
slippers-on
Active Member
You lost me...come again?David;n8267 said:slippers-on so where ya spent all that cash you would have spent on joints???
slippers-on
Active Member
Oh.....hahahahaha,,,,,Got married and had kids....been flat out broke from day I said I do!
tomlinmgt
Moderator
Sometimes I feel like this topic is given too much thought. Perhaps my perspective is a bit too simplistic, but whether it be a single mom of three watching her favorite contestant on American Idol or an anal audiophile trying to hear if his latest cable swap resulted in a positive change, the end game and conduit for both parties is the same...they both seek a pleasure event via the music. The most obvious difference between the two is the latter allocates several orders of magnitude more time, money and effort toward his quest and because the arrival at each pleasure event is more often than not finite and tedious he tends to be more, if not compulsively so, analytical about the methods he employs to get there. So much so, in fact, it's not difficult to assert that the guy listens to his gear more than the music. But regardless, there has to be the music along with the gear. You simply can't compartmentalize the two as if they're mutually exclusive of one another. I absolutely believe that one can reach a point where they put so much emphasis on reaching the next pleasure event via an improvement in the performance of the reproduction (brought about by a change in the gear) that they may not enjoy the music as much when it doesn't happen. But the terms here are not absolute. It's entirely possible to still enjoy the music even if one's observations in the course of critical listening result in the acknowledgement that the gear isn't "delivering the goods", so to speak.
Some may constantly tweak, others intermittently and some not at all and because of this the manner in which they listen can be vastly different. But I don't think it's possible to say one extreme appreciates the music more than the other...even in general terms.
Some may constantly tweak, others intermittently and some not at all and because of this the manner in which they listen can be vastly different. But I don't think it's possible to say one extreme appreciates the music more than the other...even in general terms.
Similar threads
