|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-15-2006
|
 Dominic wrote: | | .... everytime i try something or listen to something new i eventually hear a moment or remember the sound in a way that makes me think of what can be done - if only. i've yet to hear much that gets more than a kind of moment right.... |
|
It works diffidently and similarly for me. I’m not talking about evaluation methodology – is a different subject and I’m not talking about playback assessment by musical values of reproduced music – it is separate subject as well. I’m talking juts about the very simple and “practical” assessment of heard sound. Generally I have developed very fast and mostly very accurate ability to hear what I feel need to be heard in reproduced sound and I have no problems to identify “what is wrong” and “what can be done”. It is important to understand that I might instantaneously to recognize “what is wrong” but it is not necessarily that I might know “why it was wrong” – in fact to answer this questions might take a LOT. However what is fascinating that after listening Sound my mind enters another state, the state that Dominick named “remember the sound”…
I very much value that “memories about sound” and for me an ability to look at “my Sound of past” and to observe how my inner-me reacts to those memories is very important and very indicative in the assessment of how valuable THAT Sound was. I have learned a LOT about a personality of Sound juts by recalling and thinking about the “reminisced sound”. In some instances the “memories about sound” say more about the Sound’s nature then the actual experience of the Sound. Rgs,
Romy the Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-19-2006
|
What is interesting that “remembering sound” works differently with our minds then just “listening sound”. When we listen sound we might or might not listen the sound itself but when we are “remembering sound” we do not listen the sound but rather a reaction of our inner-us to the sound. There are very few advanced listeners among audiophiles who have developed their listening techniques up to the point where they completely disassociate their immediate “pure sonic reactions” with their overall listening experience. Those people “bounce” this listening impressions from “demanded sound of performed / expressed intentions” instead juts passively observing “the heard sound”. Ironically, the very same, extrapolative and hypnotizing process is talking place in our mines where we do not actually listen to sound but rather “remembering sound” out or our memory. I generally feel that for the beginners of the Real Audio “remembering sound” is a very simple but very effective exercise to filter own their brain’s poor listening habits and learn how to stricture own listening intelligence to operate at higher levels of listening awareness.
Rgs, The Cat
|
|
|
|
Posted by Dominic on
11-20-2006
|
Some may remember this: http://www.clarisonus.com/blog/?p=85
somewhere mixed into the responses to the article is something very important for understanding of sound playback. A someone who went by the moniker Shuvam wrote about learning to listen. To real sounds.
i'll excerpt the following
Shuvam said: There are so many sounds which in reality are dramatically different
from the impressions we carry in our heads when we describe them in
oft-used phrases. I have discovered quite often that when I really
_listen_, the real sounds are not nice or pretty. And I hadn’t even
noticed this till now. This has been a humbling experience; a
forty-year-old engineer with engineering degrees from one of the top
institutes in country suddenly wakes up and realises that he did not
even know how to listen."
You have to learn how to hear, and not for soundstange or bass extension, but for the colour and character and texture of real sound.
Rom, you make an important point yourself about understanding how the sound you remember affected you.
I generally remember for those 'ah' moments a feeling of connectedness, like the electronics and acoustics drop away and a connection with the meaning and life of the performance is established as thought it is happening here and now. Sounds a bit daft but that's music for you. The interesting thing to note, that i was hopefully getting across in the other thread was that each manifestation of a playback system that creates an 'ah' sound speaks of the performance from a different aspect. I'm always trying to figure out what it is that can finally get that 'ah' under more than one condition.
|
|
|
|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-20-2006
|
| Dominic wrote: | | Shuvam said: There are so many sounds which in reality are dramatically different from the impressions we carry in our heads when we describe them in oft-used phrases. I have discovered quite often that when I really _listen_, the real sounds are not nice or pretty. And I hadn’t even noticed this till now. This has been a humbling experience; a forty-year-old engineer with engineering degrees from one of the top institutes in country suddenly wakes up and realises that he did not even know how to listen." |
|
What Shuvam said is very typical for very many people. My estimate is the 99% of people who do High-End audio are intellectually deaf and have no proper listening skills. However, there is something more to it (and I will try do not go into this subject too deep). Evan if a person, for instance Shuvam, discovers his listening ignorance and spent efforts to develop his listening intelligence then his new developed listening intelligence has no framework to be understood or embraced by people who do audio. You see, listening intelligence is a sense of (self) realization but it is absorbing sense, not an expressed one. It is imposable to share this realization directly (possible only indirectly). Therefore, Shuvam might say that he “did not even know how to listen” and people still might understand him. However, if he said “I know how to listen” then there is a very large array of very stratified meanings that the phases might imply. The most remarkable is that deeper Shuvam would go in his true meanings of his listening knowledge the less communicative his rustling observations will be.
Rgs,
Romy the CatPS: I have to make clear that in my post I made one intestinal inaccuracy. I had my reasons to do it is you picked it up then you understand why I simplified it.
|
|