Are we training our ears right?


This subject comes up a lot, and degenerates into questions about what the human brain/ear mechanism is capable of hearing. 

I want to instead discuss what we should be listening for. 

Too many of us (myself often included) treat audio gear as it's own goal.  We train ourselves to hear differences for no other reason than to hear differences.   I got started ages ago in motion picture audio.  Think 1,500 seat auditoriums, not home theater.  I was constantly paying attention to dust on the film and crackling in the surround.  I often couldn't tell if a movie was good or bad because I was trying to clean the film or trace down equipment which was malfunctioning.  It's a terrible way to enjoy movies.  

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that you can train yourself to hear differences in a fuse.  WHY would you do that?  How does that let you enjoy the 45th live recording of the Grateful Dead's Truckin' ?  The neighbor who 100% cannot hear a difference in fuses is going to enjoy your stereo better than you can. 

I'm going to argue that learning to listen to equipment this well is for manufacturers and reviewers.  Maybe we are trying to outdo them, I don't know, but it's not a road that leads us to enjoying music, is it? 

 

 

erik_squires

This is another overthinking post.

I don’t tell my ears or brain what to listen for or what to ignore. They naturally and unconsciously detect differences, and I simply follow up by rolling components to make the listening experience better, according to my taste. There’s always a feedback loop between me and my system as I work toward improving the sound.

This process doesn’t make me enjoy the music any less. If anything, it enhances my enjoyment, whether consciously or unconsciously.

At first, a mountain is just a mountain, and water is just water.
Then, a mountain is no longer just a mountain, and water is no longer just water.
Finally, a mountain is once again a mountain, and water is once again water.

I think you’re overthinking the issue in the 2nd stage, IF (and only IF) it is an issue at all.

 

@roadcykler "...I've never understood why someone who isn't a reviewer or product tester listens for flaws in music."

I completely agree... if only I could not "unheard" a flaw once heard. But that is the nature of those of us who appreciate high end systems... the better it sounds the more we love it but we can't not hear issue. (yes, I said it that way on purpose:.

@2psyop 

 

It’s hard to find the question there?? You are making a point?

Maybe you should have read all thew way to the end?  The question is very explicit. 

Maybe we are trying to outdo them, I don’t know, but it’s not a road that leads us to enjoying music, is it? 

I’m making a point while at the same time leaving the door open for discussion for and against it.  The simplest answer would have been : 

"Yes, it leads to me enjoying music and here is why..." or it’s counter. 

When I was in college, I went to rock concerts as often as I could afford. Most were outside venues with maybe 2000 seats under the tent and room for about 15xxx more on the lawn. (I never sat under the tent) With all the people and being outside it was almost impossible hear anything well. Later in life I went to more inside shows and the sound was better, but nowhere like listening to the record at home. About thirty years ago, they renovated one of our two really good Theaters and now there isn’t a bad seat in the house!  I saw Steely Dan there twice and OMG it sounded better than the record!

Now when I listen to music, I picture myself being at the venue listening live and trying to place where I’m sitting in the audience.

On the camera analogy, a friend of mine is trained as a police photographer.  He is often asked "What is the best camera?".

He usually answers "It is the one you have in your hand when you want to take a photo".