I've been setting a bit of time at night (when it's quiet) before I go to bed, to really focus of listening to music critically, I've gotten better, but I still have a way to go knowing exactly what the differences are, such as 'bass is tighter is recording A compared to recording B', or the 'songs a bit flat here'. Hopefully with the advice given so far, and the advice I'll still get I can develop this.LSD and 'Shrooms and marijuanna are still around, I don't see how those are any different to the past. But anyway enough about illegal things. My signature is also there because I'm a fan of Aldous Huxley, Ken Kessey, and Alan Ginsberg's work and they are all ties into that phrase and Timothy Leary and what it represents.
I'm still of the opinion "critical listening" is largely a waste of one's time, energy and intelligence. That's not to disparage the people who do it for a living but that accounts for just a very small percentage of us. In even those instances too many times the cart is placed before the horse and the effect of the music the system reproduces is all but forgotten in order to discuss the sound itself.
The CD for the Critical Listening Skills for Audio Professionals
Just listen. The more you get involved in judging your system or the sound it produces the less time you'll spend enjoying the music it provides. IMO the most difficult thing for most "audiophiles' is to sit and listen to music and not judge (and all too often nitpick) the system's sound whether the system is their's or it belongs to someone else. Once you fall into the habit of judging, listening for enjoyment will forever more be hopelessly your second choice. You'll be listening to music you really enjoy and before you know it - BAM! - you'll find yourself not intersted in the music because you're sitting there judging the performance of the system.
That's what I'm talking about, "finding flaws". I have no problem with anyone upgrading their system to reproduce music as best they can afford. However, finding flaws is what audiophiles do best it would seem. Sitting there in the dark, usually all alone, listening and judging the system is all too often what keeps audiophiles interested IMO. Why do readers clamor for negative reviews? They want those flaws to be there, it's good to see a product get brought up short every now and then.
Wise words Jan, in fact when I read of hi-fidelity being a 'hobby' my radar switches on. How to explain that? Well, I've up-graded, and even successfully 'downgraded' more times than I can remember but for me the measure of success is how often the enjoyment of music prevents me putting on my critical audiophile hat. Thankfully that's most of the time these days and would be more so if it wasn't for crappy recordings and the viral spread of compression, MP3 etc.
Priorities are something you can possess without ever hearing a decent audio system. Priorities should come from listening to good live music and not from any audio system. "Brittle", "silvery", "warm", "bright" "air" ambient clues", etc. should all be in your set of priorities that go with knowing how an instrument sounds in a real acoustic space. You don't need to know them by name, you just need to know whether you can live with them or not. You won't realize you don't like Chinese parsley until you know the taste of Chinese parsley doesn't appeal to you.
If you know what a piano, guitar, horn, kazoo, etc. sounds like played live a few feet away from you, you won't pick a system with "brittle" highs unless constrained by budget. If you can trade occasionally "brittle" highs for rolled off highs or the other way 'round, then you have your priorities. If you have priorities you can pick a good system. Critical listening skills and the glossary that completes them merely allow you to describe what you hear to someone who might be interested. Most people are not but many people will be willing to discuss their favorite music with you.
I think Jan is wrong to dismiss critical listening. When you're making recordings, for example, you want to get the best recording possible and don't want to do anything you'll regret later, whether you're a pro or not. (Like recording in mp3 would be a mistake for most of us on this site). So there are times when you need to address how the system sounds.
Reading things around the place I have definitely noticed some people tend to be so focused on being critical and perfecting their system searching they don't actually enjoy the music, which really sounds good through what they have.I did make a pretty conscience decision not to be like that, I'm doing this because I like music. A similar example would be I regularly go to the movies (a love that nearly rivals music (although music is more of a constant presence for everything in life)) now the is a room that cost ten's of thousand's (even more) of dollars specifically to display films. But I still enjoy watching movies on my T.V. which isn't very good at all, even though pales in comparison, because the movie is still enjoyable.I mainly want to develop some basic skill in critical listening as it'll help me distinguish the difference between products as I head into buying things. I also it will help me further appreciate the system I end up having. I want to develop my critical listening to increase my appreciation of a system, not systematically exploit all it's flaws.
That's not exactly what I said. My hestitance is toward "critical listening'. The sort of "follow a line" type of listening described by Buddha is what we all do as far as I know. We listen with some intensity to our favorite vocalist to hear the nuances and inflections they employ, to notice how they get ahead of or lag behind the beat to make an expressive statement.
This, however, is not "critical listening" IMO. This is nothing more than exploring the performers and their performances and comes down to listening to music with intent and focus on the performance. That is the resason for owning a more transparent to the source audio system in the first place, is it not?
To me, critical listening is not just about hearing which system gives me deeper and tighter bass. It's about which one draws me in more, and which one reveals more musical truth. I would rather sacrifice some bass and even midrange fullness if what I hear has a magical transparency that draws me in.
I agree critical listen has its place, as in making the decisions you were engaged in last weekend. However, what I am against is developing a judgement system that you cannot switch off. That is what I see in too many audiophiles who, even when listening for "pleasure", are constantly judging their system or a specific component.
I've mentioned in another thread a concept I have of "concert ears" which is built around approaching each listening session just as you would a live performance. If you are critical of a live performance it is typically the skill or artistry or choices of the performer(s) you are criticizing not whether they had palpable space surrounding them, whether they sounded a bit forward or too laid back, and PRaT is not something I judge at a live performance. A live performance is what it is - the reference for all else.
In the thread where I discussed the "concert ears" exercise, I said it should not be considered successful until the listener has gone one entire week listening only to the music and not once thinking about the performance of their system. I would think that to be a very tough challenge for most audiophiles.
These are instances where "critical listening" comes into play. You have developed a love-hate relationship with your home music system. You love it when it "sends" you the way music OUGHT to "send" you, but you are dissatisfied when you throw on/in the occasional software that makes you think, "surely, I can do better than this."
I don't disagree but isn't that what "critical listening " is about? You are personally finding those elements which appeal to you and those that do not. Those are abstract ideas that are difficult to explain, so difficult a new vocabulay needed to be created just for the abstraction of "soundstage", "imaging", "dry", etc. And say many of those words to another audiophile and they still might not grasp just what it is you are trying to describe. So, yes, critical listening is very abstract. Enjoying music is not.
I don't totally disagree as to the use of critical listening skills when making a purchasing decision, however, I still contend they are useless 99% of the time to 99% of those involved in music reproduction in their home. It is the inability to shut off those cricial listening "skills" which drives someone to find they have listened to the same component for too long a time. Now, admittedly, this comes from someone who owns a pair of forty seven year old amplifiers that I have owned for over twenty five years. Much of that time I was actively engaged in the selling of audio equipment so I listened critically on most nights and a good part of each day. Maybe I'm the exception but I have never felt I have owned what I consider to be an excellent piece of equipment for too long a time.
Well, I have a few years of experience too. Possibly that is why I have no need for critical listening skills since I have no bank account that would support being unhappy just for the sake of being unhappy with my system. I know what my system can achieve, others also enjoy it and I fully understand what other systems can achieve in comparison. That knowledge has become my comfort zone for staying with what I own and just listening to the music. 2ff7e9595c
Comments