Thought Piece: Listening Biases and System Enjoyment

ggraff

New member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
41
Location
Denver, CO
Harry Pearson, once of the Absolute Sound and currently of HP Soundings, has indicated that live music is the measurement by which all audio systems must be judged. While I agree philosophically that live music reproduction in our systems is our ultimate objective, I also understand that achievement of that is impossible. For those of you who believe a system can accurately reproduces a live music event, please don’t waste your time reading the rest of this article. Rather, go directly to the nearest live music event and do not pass Go or collect $200.

For the rest of you still reading, I postulate that since we cannot completely and accurately reproduce a live music event with our systems, we must find some other achievable objective by which to judge the quality of our systems. In other words, find happiness in listening to music. I submit that for many of us that objective is to have your system do certain things which allow you enjoy the music, maybe to the point that you are able to suspend reality and let yourself believe you are hearing a performance in your listening room. There may be other objectives out there for some people, but I will focus my thought piece on this particular objective and how it manifests itself in the audio community/industry.

I further postulate that not all people share the same criteria when listening to systems. After years of listening to numerous systems and people’s reactions to these systems, it has become very evident to me that what is important to the enjoyment of a system is not the same for all people. Listening to the same system, I have heard people comment that they liked it very much because it did X, Y, Z very well while other people listening to the same system didn’t like it because it didn’t do A, B, C very well. What they are really saying is that I liked/disliked the system because it did/did not achieve one or more of my listening biases. It did or did not allow me to enjoy the music.

You can also use this same logic to judge individual pieces of equipment, but to further complicate this judgment you must also factor in system synergy for each piece of equipment. While amplifier Humungous may sound really good in one system, does not automatically mean it will sound good in every system because of system synergy. Add to that the fact that it may sound good/right to some because it meets one or more of your listening biases while for others it doesn’t and therefore, does not sound good or right.

Of those of you who are still awake and reading this, I am sure more than a few are now saying, “Well, duh you have pinpointed the obvious, so what’s your point.” Glad you asked. Actually, I have three points to consider.

First, if you are serious about music, you need to explore and listen to many systems and pieces of equipment in order to understand what your listening biases are and what you ultimately want your system to do. This can either be a life long pursuit for those of us who are deranged maniacs called audiophiles who are trying to achieve the unachievable, or it can be a fairly short pursuit for the rational individuals who just want to enjoy music and couldn’t care less whether your system has the last level of _________ (fill in the blank here). For the deranged I will use myself as an example. My overall system objective is to hear the musical/emotional expression of the performer and connect with that emotion. Until recently, I didn’t realize how important speed in a system was to me to enhance my listening enjoyment. Hearing the leading edge of a voice or an instrument allows me to more easily understand the music expression of the musician. I have been an audiophile for close to 40 years and just now really understand how important that is for my enjoyment. You must understand what allows you connect to the music. The perverse part of this is that until you change something in your system or hear something in another system, you may not know you are missing something. Talk about introducing paranoia.

Second, there are many, many manufacturers out there developing products for our consideration. Almost all of them are trying to achieve a certain sound that fits their listening biases. Most of these pieces have one or more redeeming points to them and in the right environment will probably sound reasonably good to a number of people. The problem is as an audiophile you will have to sort through a lot of chaff to find something that will work for you. There is a price to be paid for being deranged and this is it. Manufacturers could help in this pursuit by engaging in the use of listening panels so that not just their particular listening biases are addressed. If nothing else, they will at least understand what is “good” about their product and what could be improved. Ultimately, this may result in less overall chaff to sort through.

Third, you should view equipment/system reviews made by the various audio publications with a jaundiced eye. You must at least be aware that they have their own listening biases and system synergy issues when reviewing any product. This is particularly true when they compare one component to another. Reviewers need to state something to the effect that “in my system (and room- see my upcoming diatribe-“Its The Room, Stupid” for further information about room/system interaction) component X displayed A, B, C characteristics. By doing this you can see if this particular piece might be worth exploring because your listening biases include A, B, C. Unfortunately, too many times we read flowery prose that does little to inform the reader objectively about what the strengths and weaknesses are in a particular product- in their system/room. Then there is the infamous Class A rating for products in a highly regarded publication. I will almost guarantee that if you took the highest rated product in each equipment category, you would end up with a very expensive system that sounded like crap or at least didn’t meet your listening requirements.

Bottom line- only you can determine what you want your system to sound like and you cannot depend on others to tell you what is best. Audiophiledom is a journey, not a destination. It is a process not a result. To get satisfaction from it you must understand what you are trying to achieve, otherwise you will never be satisfied.
 
Appreciate the underlying message and yet optimistic that technology will keep getting us closer to live performance. Perhaps almost virtual live audio experience is actually closer than we think

Nick
 
No live music in my county except once in a great while and then it's far too expensive to go to it. It's been a long time (years) since I've taken in some live music and I miss it, but there is nothing I can do about it. My listening bias is straight and simple. No need to listen to hundreds of systems (although I have heard a few and found most to be lackluster except a couple). My take is: If it sounds good to my ears, then it is. We all hear differently. What sounds like great reproduction of live sound to one person, may sound off kilter to another. It's all relative to one's environment too.
 
I absolutely agree about not needing great hi-fi to enjoy the music. Connecting with the emotion of the music either happens or it doesn't. The equipment is secondary. That might be an interesting question to pose to the group- Do you think that as your system advances you enjoy the music more? For me, the answer is no. Others may feel differently.

gjg
 
There is precious little "live" music that is not amplified. I have also had some pretty sucky seats at live events. So I am always somewhat puzzled at just exactly what "live" sounds like and why it is such a Holy Grail. For me I want an emotional connection to the music. And that is what I strive for in my system. I want to forget the system is there and not worry about how much shimmer the cymbal had. I am also a "word" person so I want to be able to hear and connect to the lyrics. I also have different expectations in different environments. I do not expect the same level of fidelity in my car. But if the music can touch me and make me forget what I am doing and drive into a ditch then that works. :amazing: off-topic--why can't I use the enter key to make a new paragraph?:weird:
 
Welcome Dizzie,

Thanks for joining.

As far as no paragraphs I think it has something to do with advanced options in your forum settings.
 
This really raises some GOOD things. Is live music really what we strive for or sound that is pleasing? Does the format dictate part of this?

For example, orchestral music or jazz would be something I want to hear as close to live as possible and offers the best chance of duplication. But rock on the other hand has a variety of factors. Such as:
1) Did it sound like crap live (music so loud that it overpowers the lead singer) - Been there, hated it
2) Was it recorded in a studio via individual tracks and with effects so there really is no definition of live performance
3) Is it newer music that makes every singer sound like the have synthesized vocal chords?
4) Additionally, what about ones preference for more bass, less bass, forward mids" Beautiful music is in the ear of the beholder...As US Grant once said "I only know 2 songs. One is Yankee Doodle. The other one isn't"

I think sometimes people get too hung up on reproduction and don't let themselves enjoy the music. Not every album of (gasp) digital cut is going to sound like you are in a lounge in front of the band. Expectations set at that level are bound to be unmet.
 
I couldn't think of a worse recommendation than "live". I really am disillusioned about concerts etc in the way of things these days as in a sound "reference". I've heard way too many live performances that have been bad soundwise & that is why I am into hi-fi. I want master recordings performed to the best of the artists ability in a controlled environment so that I can capture the magic that they have every-time & to connect on a level that is hit & miss with live performances. To me, this is my reference.
 
Back
Top