It's All in Your Head


I commented in an earlier thread that the emphasis on components, cables and room treatments obscures the fact that the music all happens in your head.

This is from John Atkinson at RMAF 2012 reported on Stereophile:

"Stereophile editor John Atkinson used everything from a drumstick to a cowbell, both sounded “live” and played back on the seminar room’s stereo system, to convey the message: “Nothing is real. How the recording art affects what you think you hear!” As John proceeded to point out that the brain combines information from separate left and right loudspeakers into a single stereo image..."

"I showed that it is a fallacy to assume that “the absolute sound of live music in a real acoustic space” resides in the bits, pits, or grooves, even when such a live event existed. Making recordings is an art, not a science and there may only be a coincidental resemblance between what is presented to the listener and the sound of musicians playing live, even when all concerned with making the recording were trying to be as honest as possible. Even the fundamental decision of what microphone to use moves the recorded sound a long way from reality..."

What we aim for when we put an audio system together is a pleasing facsimile of the original musical performance that happened in a studio or at a live venue. But, ultimately, the music's all in your head. It sounds like it's in the room because that's the way our brain makes it seem. Music is essentially a spiritual experience mediated by the brain.
Systems that are not in the "best" category may reproduce music in a way that moves us but the "best" systems have the ability to involve us on even deeper emotional and spiritual levels.

Getting really close to the essence of the performance means we need "special" gear. That's what "gear chasing" is all about -- trying to get closer to the essence of the performance on deeper and more satisfying levels. "Gear chasing" that involves trying to reproduce the actual performance is an illusory pursuit. Many audiophiles have observed that the "best" systems are not necessarily the most expensive ones. This has also been my experience. But it will still take quite a bit of cash to put together a system that enters the realm of the "best".

All of the above is IMO, of course.
sabai
I would agree with Marakenetz. It isn't artful when the recorded vocals sound like actual people and instruments sound like real instruments. It's just accurate. A utilitarian baseline brush from which a picture can then be painted. To not include all the other aspects of system performance in this category is skewing the definition of art, imo.
Reading all of this conjured an image in my mind of listening to music through our systems as a 'spiritual' experience, without the robes and artifacts.

If this were to be seen as a spiritual experience, then yes, it's all in your head. All the auditory clues would be just another part of the ritual, along with the equipment (taking the place of chalices, altars, mats, missiles, etc.), with the end result being the reward you contrive in your head.

Can it be said that one feeling better, spiritually, in a richer, better adorned church, temple, synagogue or mosque is akin to having better equipment to 'hear' your music? Does driving a better, higher class of car make the trip more enjoyable? Or maybe taking a photo with a Leica or Hasselblad over that of a Canon or Sony?

Maybe it can all be judged as to when one's audio nirvana is achieved and buying something better and costlier is no longer needed. But this would be pertinent only to the one who is spiritually sated and cannot be a bright line to judge others.

Atkinsin's take on this is just one of many ways to interpret it and it does make one think.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not denigrating religion or spiritual enlightenment, just seeing the similarities. And if I remember correctly, there has been many a discussion here, on the rewards of listening and how we interpret it.

I must also state that all of this is art and science. Everything on the hardware side of the equation could only be attained by science. Else, we'd be all listening live to achieve our spiritual goals. To negate the science (and mechanics) and relegate all of this to just interpretation would be a great leap of faith, so the speak.

All the best,
Nonoise
Interesting. I believe that recording is both an art and a science...that both highly elevated emotion AND gear-chasing, for instance, are essential for the BEST-sounding recordings.

Csontos: "It isn't artful when the recorded vocals sound like actual people and instruments sound like real instruments. It's just accurate." Well, yes I suppose, but what's 'accurate'? If the mic is a foot from the singer's mouth and the speakers reproducing that sound are 6 feet from your ears, how can the reproduced sound be 'accurate'? If a recording made by, for example, Channel Classics reproduces reasonably the sound of the orchestra in its hall and I LOVE that sound, the lover of in-your-face pop music probably will HATE the sound. 'Where's the presence?', he/she may say. What is 'accurate' here? What the conductor hears? What the tympanist hears in the back of the orchestral shell? What someone sitting in the middle of row 8 hears?

Jared Sacks, owner (I believe) and (variously) recording producer, balance engineer, editor, etc. of Channel Classics wrote recently about a new mic-preamp/analog-to-DSD DAC that CC is now using, along with new VandenHul cables, to help explain a higher degree of transparency achieved in a new release of Mahler's Symphony #1. See
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/27/278805.html specifically and
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/27/278785.html for the entire thread.

Art? Yes.

Science? Yes.

In your head? Absolutely, just as the original sound is perceived in your brain.
.
I am a troglodyte. All I do is listen to music. And like it.
Gee... how disgustingly primitive.
I plan on going and soaking my head after tonight's session.

Sorry.

Sublime experiences seem to be personal. Trying to trade in them is disgusting.