It is interesting how my audio interests enter something that I call "design mode". The Design Mode is not really a state of being but rather a state or interaction between sound reproduction and me.
As I said before I seldom think in term of ability of the elements of playback to deliver own things instead, I try to think in term of the element’s capacity to accomplish my objectives. To me, design something in audio is more about visualization of results and conceptualizing of methods. I do not bind objectives to concepts but try to invent and conceive outcome of a solution without having a solution. Interesting that before the "solution" shape itself as tangible accomplishment the most interesting parts starts: I test it.
It might be sound very off the wall but I very much hear and do listen the “visualized Sound”. I listen it on my playback, on anyone else playback, during listening live sound or playing music in my head. I assess how different interpretations of a specific peaces would be affected my new sonic visualization and sometimes I feel where the delta between the obtainable sound and visualization sound is. This pretty much sets very precise target what I would like to get in the end of the "design processes". I might agree that this "design mode" is semi-hallucinatory process but perception IS reality and where is the appropriateness of sound reproduction lives besides in our own minds?
Anyhow, when the visualization process is through and all my inner-me agrees upon what I heard then, only then I turn a system or a solder on, and try to do deferent things with them: would it be teaching the amplifiers to sound, building horns or inventing bicycle. While I do so, I’m trying to make audio to do what I have visualized and although the accidents are possible but even positive accidents recognized as positive only if they are affinity with the visualization results.
I would like to BS anyone and particularly myself: I very rarely know HOW to accomplish the visualized results and how to get there. It usually happens, if ever happens, by employing various discovery, research and help means. Still, it always implies a lot of spent time, money, burned efforts, making a lot of mistakes, faulty conclusions other ego not gratifying things. Also, in many cases a solution to accomplish the visualized result never was found. However, the most interesting part is that the solution is not the most important part for me. The most important part and the most fascinating part for me is the process of inventing the visualization and the process of thinking about the validity of the visualization…
Another, interesting aspect of the "design mode" is that when I am process of fulfilling the visualization I’m practically loosing my desire to listen music. I do listen music but I do it differently and very not “technically”. Of course I do not juts listen the sounds and my definitions of “technical listening” implies all six levels of listing evaluations:
but still my listening during this phases is too much filled of hierarchy to be “interesting” at higher level of listening perception (4th and up) . Therefore during my "design mode" I try to not touch any new interesting material that would require a free awareness to reflect the heard. For instance, now I have an amassing collection of early recordings of my beloved John Barbirolli that I’m holding off to dive in. Amphissa sent me a wonderful collection of Nikolai Myaskovsky’s recording that I also keep putting aside. I have a pile of interesting, new to me, recordings of US’s composers from 1946-47 that I prepared for myself to listen when I “will be back” but did not touch them for a few weeks…
Anyhow, the "design mode" is different state of my audio involvement…
Romy the caT