2. misc-audio
  3. 1350722516

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
jeffreybehr's avatar
jeffreybehr
805 posts
 
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.
.
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
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.
csontos
1,275 posts
 
I never looked at it as a spiritual quest. Before I realized I'd become an audiophile, I resented the term because I felt it pigeonholed me into an elitist group outside of mainstream music enthusiasts. Most of my friends and acquaintances had very modest systems back then but loved music as most of us did. Crossing the line into audiophiledom I think profoundly changes your perspective. All of a sudden, how you hear the music is just as important, or even more so in the beginning, as just hearing it. So if there's a spiritual side, I'd say it's more like a cult. Some kind of need to prove something. To ourselves and then having it confirmed by others. I think I loved music more as a child. I remember getting up early at age 12 to make sure I heard the upcoming new tune announced the day before on the radio by Five Man Electrical Band entitled "Signs". I also remember singing top 40's hits on my way to school. Music back then was certainly a spiritual experience.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
4,163 posts
 
If it's all in your head why don't you just train your mind to respond to a crappy system the same way it would respond to a great system? A beautiful woman standing naked before you can make a man sexually aroused, but so can pornographic images. It's a learned response. Why even have a physical stimulus at all? Just think about the music and transport yourself to a higher plane.
csontos
1,275 posts
 
I think you're on to something! However I think the training took place in reverse.
More to discover