The Absurdity of it All

@johnspain  Agreed. Hard for some to accept, but what we perceive is something developed with others. Sure, we taste things or hear or see things with our particular apparatuses, but interpretation is a socially mediated ability, like language. That’s why people take wine tasting or art appreciation classes. The notion that hearing-with interpretation is an individual-only ability is an anachronistic idea. It is, in a word, silly. 

For those who contend that we only need to rely on our ears - If that is the case, why would we need Audiogon or any other hobbyists forum. We need it as a source of information or to validate our own thinking. What we don’t need is someone preaching to us or trying to make us look foolish in front of those we look to for help.

Hearing is not only an inherited ability(perfect pitch individual) but it is a learned habit we develop in many ways...

I come here for information and discoveries...

But i started to progress the day i decide to trust my own hearing biases and let them flourished or be replaced by others one...I begin by trusting what i listen to trying to understand why the sound is such and not such and how could i modify it for my own liking....

I did that because when you dont have the luxury of money if you want to live an audiophile experience there is only one way: listening experiments with low cost devices of your own...

I am glad to this day that trusting my own wishes and hearing possibilities i reach my goal....

Then the first thing to learn is knowing that our ears are the seat of the experience not the gear....How we embed it is more important than any upgrade...

And acoustic is the master of all in audio...Not the gear...

Called that preaching if you want...

But it is the most important fact i learned the hard way....

It dont lack of people here to inform us how to spend our money with various branded names.... I prefer to explain how to spare it, if my experience can help a little in this way....

Acoustic and psychoacoustic for example give to us the law with which we can create our own timbre experience, soundstage, imaging, listener envelopment (LEV) and that with very simple principle....

The relatively good gear we own in most case is enough for this explorations and experiences...

This is my "preaching"...

By the way there is many other people here very competent for all other necessary very technical answers.... It is a very good forum....

The worst thing here would be NOT trusting our own hearing experience and learning , trusting mainly the words of praise of others about costly gear.... This is the upgrade pit....Few comes over it and at the end the cost is heavy...








😊😊😊😊😊

I'm giving up. Other HELP forums have not digress to this communications style. I leave you with it.

Kevn, You are right there is much more to sound than hearing. There is feeling and that is a real problem for many if not most systems. They do not feel right. There is this one elderly, totally deaf gentleman that listens to music by feeling it. There is a YouTube video on him you might be able to find. At a live performance it is that visceral sensation that adds that extra thrill missing at home. My mission has always been to reproduce that thrill at home but still maintain timbral accuracy. Imaging and accuracy are good things to shoot for but if the system does not feel right it is all to naught.

mijostyn4,

... agreed and perhaps this "feeling" aspect is most evident when it comes to PRaT. For some listeners, this is a crucial aspect of enjoyment and speaking as one such listener, my impression has always been that this is much more of a "whole body sensing" experience than an "aural" experience. Above all, I want to feel emotionally involved in the listening experience and given the above, it would appear that my body must be involved in order for my emotions to be engageded. I'm sure this is not the case for everyone. 

I'm very curious about the nature of the "thrill" you associate with live perfromances. What is different about live music?  Most obviously, the audience occupies the same space as the muscians and we experience the music in the company of others. 

At first I thought it must be the presence of visual information -- the ability to see the expressions on musicians' faces and their body language, for example, that might account for the "thrill". Then I recalled that if I'm really absorbed in the music at a live show, I habitually close my eyes, to screen out visual distractions. 

I'd be very interested to hear more about what you believe constitues the "thrill", if you care to expound...