We hear what we expect to hear

[raistlin65]

I would say it's just normal acclimation/accommodation. The same we Toole says we begin to 'hear through' a room's defects after a short time.

Right. And notice the language. An "accommodation" or "acclimation" that gets us to where we want to go: telling the difference between lesser and better equipment.

So let's take a step back. And acknowledge that within that space, there may not be a perceived benefit to that difference without direct comparison. Thus, I chose the term "tolerance" to indicate that there is some level, some degree to which that happens.

For example, it could be that upgrading a speaker to a higher speaker within the same quadrille of performance ranking, such as used on ASR, may not result in real-world difference that improves the listening experience because our brains adapt. It's only in our testing that we perceive that difference.

For an analogy, consider making stew and adding 1 tablespoon of salt. Maybe I can taste the difference between it and 9/10 of a tablespoon of salt in the stew. And in comparing them directly, I find one better than the other. But separated by time, perhaps my enjoyment of them would be exactly the same.

 

[magicscreen]

"Although participants recognised the deviant faster when it was placed on positions where they expected it, the subcortical nuclei encoded the sounds only when they were placed in unexpected positions. "

So they were able to recognize the difference. Where is the problem?

 

[Feelas]

"Although participants recognised the deviant faster when it was placed on positions where they expected it, the subcortical nuclei encoded the sounds only when they were placed in unexpected positions. "

So they were able to recognize the difference. Where is the problem?

Well, unless you know exactly what "expected" and "unexpected" means, then I'd really compare it to reading parts of words instead of reading wrords lerret by letrer. If sound isn't coded if it matches the expectation, then the difference won't be coded unless it breaches some threshold; one might only wonder how big that threshold is. And that in fact to assess what you want to assess, you need to have LOTS of experience, to know that you can experience a lot and automatically test the hypothesis for each one. That'd nicely explain why experience people in general hear more, they just expect miniscular differences and know what to listen for. Not surprising, is it?

You know, where you don't see the mistakes you made, when they've been read a thousand times before, much like university professors.

 

[Deleted member 22141]

I recently "upgraded" my KEF LS50s to QAcoustics Concept 300s. The new ones cost 4X what the old ones did. They measure better. The reviewers unanimously think they are better.

Initially I was horrified. I loved the way my old speakers sounded and the new ones were different. I experienced that before too when I upgraded my very old and low-end hifi. I had become accustomed to "hearing through" the equipment to the music and it took my brain a few weeks to adapt to the new stuff.

A lot of A-B listening later I managed to convince myself that the C300s were a little better. I think I could tell now at better than chance level which set of speakers I was listening to in a blind test - but it would probably depend on the music.

Family members whom I roped into the tests couldn't hear a difference. After 20 minutes their eyes were filled with a desperation and the question written on their faces was: "What does he want me to say so that he will let me go?"

And that was speakers!!

Hear the difference between halfway decent DACs or amplifiers? In a blind test? I would not put any money on myself to be able to reliably tell in my London flat. I think I might maybe be able to move off of sheer chance late at night when it's very quiet.

Sure there is a difference between crap and good, but good is way more affordable than it used to be. At some point fairly soon I think I will have satisfied myself that unless I want to give my dog a better audio experience then I have upgraded enough.

 

[Thomas savage]

I stopped listening critically a few years ago , its a artificial state of mind and not helpful.

I just use whatever it is thats new or different and wait and see if I stop listening to music as much or find myself getting irritated more often .

Try not to draw too many conclusions, try not to push assumptions onto my experience.

The biggest unreliable non consistent thing in hifi is the meat sack listening , so best not let it influence things too much lol

The sub conscious will inform you , through behavioral changes . Thats my method anyway .

 

[raistlin65]

Sure there is a difference between crap and good, but good is way more affordable than it used to be. At some point fairly soon I think I will have satisfied myself that unless I want to give my dog a better audio experience then I have upgraded enough.

There we go. Let's train dogs to evaluate audio equipment. There are undoubtedly some audiophiles who want their speakers to reach their "full potential" who might want such a dog. lol

 

[Katji]

I had become accustomed to "hearing through" the equipment to the music and it took my brain a few weeks to adapt to the new stuff.

The real meaning of "burn in". But they don't want to know. Why? - Because it points to that elephant in the room, whose name is Psychology. Sometimes

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

There should be more replies to this thread. Everyone needs to read this, since it is direct biological evidence, rather than being cognitive theory based on listening test response with subjects.

Of course, I'm sure it will still be rejected by subjectivists.

I'm a subjectivist. I don't rejected it.

I still don't reject it.

 

[Benedium]

I guess just as there is no point for the spiritual person to argue with the scientist in other fields, same goes for audio.

All audio science people started as subjective 'spiritualists' with beliefs, since everyone began with little to no science or data until they decided to do the work to investigate further, using the methods and tools of the scientific way.

For their own reasons, the others chose to believe whatever they wanted to or to 'learn' at their own pace, making mistakes that hurt few aside from their own wallets.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

Interesting and thought provoking. However, I was able to predict the study results/outcome!

Without looking, what was the the conclusion?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Without looking, what was the the conclusion?

I don't know since it was probably what my brain predicted.

 

[Wes]

I would say it's just normal acclimation/accommodation. The same we Toole says we begin to 'hear through' a room's defects after a short time.

I'm not sure those are the same.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

The biggest unreliable non consistent thing in hifi is the meat sack listening , so best not let it influence things too much lol

The sub conscious will inform you , through behavioral changes . Thats my method anyway .

That's only method that actually works.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

I don't know since it was probably what my brain predicted.

Close. If it doesn't fit your biases, it will sound wrong or you won't hear it.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I recently "upgraded" my KEF LS50s to QAcoustics Concept 300s. The new ones cost 4X what the old ones did. They measure better. The reviewers unanimously think they are better.

Initially I was horrified. I loved the way my old speakers sounded and the new ones were different. I experienced that before too when I upgraded my very old and low-end hifi. I had become accustomed to "hearing through" the equipment to the music and it took my brain a few weeks to adapt to the new stuff.

A lot of A-B listening later I managed to convince myself that the C300s were a little better. I think I could tell now at better than chance level which set of speakers I was listening to in a blind test - but it would probably depend on the music.

Family members whom I roped into the tests couldn't hear a difference. After 20 minutes their eyes were filled with a desperation and the question written on their faces was: "What does he want me to say so that he will let me go?"

And that was speakers!!

Hear the difference between halfway decent DACs or amplifiers? In a blind test? I would not put any money on myself to be able to reliably tell in my London flat. I think I might maybe be able to move off of sheer chance late at night when it's very quiet.

Sure there is a difference between crap and good, but good is way more affordable than it used to be. At some point fairly soon I think I will have satisfied myself that unless I want to give my dog a better audio experience then I have upgraded enough.

I've reached that point already actually. I have no inner desire to buy any more audio gear. I feel like the stuff I have now is doing exactly what It should be doing and I have a pretty strong sense that spending more money isn't going to bring any audible benefit. My stuff certainly isn't expensive, but (thanks in large part to information and understandings I've acquired since joining ASR) I have a solid appreciation for what it is doing and I doubt I can get anything that sounds notably better without spending a ton more - and even then I doubt there'd be much audible benefit. The only thing I'd really consider would be adding a sub at some point in the future, but in my current apartment situation that's not something I'm going to do.

 

[Jawfxr]

There's a lot of smart people on this site. If I can be so bold so as to point out few observations that have not yet been addressed. The first being that "sound" is not the same as " music". Sound, by my experience only, does not reverberate or decay like a note created by the continued vibration of a vocal chord or string that has been plucked or the head of a drum etc. The visual cortex is extremely powerful in distorting and persuading the other senses. Lastly, yes we all have ears but we all don't hear the same things. Point,...I love the relaxing attitude that comes when listening to the Greatful Dead if I'm at a concert or dancing, but if I'm listening to the music I can't! They're out of tune a lot! How can you be a professional musician and sing out of tune?...we hear differently.

 

[Deleted member 22141]

That's a very interesting observation.

As you point out, sound is what happens when there is no observer, but music happens in the consciousness of the listener.

It's certainly the case that perhaps most people don't like ALL genres of music, and if they think they do that can easily fall apart when confronted with novelty e.g. a westerner listening to Indian or Chinese music.

I have been struck recently when watching the BBC adaptation of "A suitable boy", one of the characters is a courtesan who sings to utterly rapt audiences. Clearly the people listening to her are transported the way that I am when I listen to Bach or Vivaldi. I feel like I can almost apprehend what they hear, but it's not accessible to me in the same way, it's extremely tantalising - wanting to find in the music that transcendental experience.

I too find I cannot easily access heavy metal and a lot of other music in recordings, the flaws are too manifest.

Consider the compelling attentional surplus that comes from plugging in some new equipment, which then leads to renewed appreciation of the music. The effect is so strong that audiophiles are willing to pay silly sums of money for things that sound exactly the same but renew their focus.

How else can that effect be achieved? (Possibly without spending so much money)

Prayer, meditation or it's poor modern relative "mindfulness" can also be employed.

Drugs or alcohol work for some people; alas they mostly just make me anxious.

Perhaps by exploring new genres, and new styles of listening? It certainly seems to be happening to me at the moment. A good scrobbler and a willing attitude is a better upgrade than a new amplifier.

Pre lockdown I often tried to mix an encounter of beauty or novelty with portable music. This can take various forms of course; from running with the right high-tempo electronic music to listening to Bach whilst walking around The National Gallery. It's why venue and audience is so important in the experience too. The music helps transcend ourselves. Metal concerts, jazz clubs, organ recitals in thousand-year-old churches, pop music surrounded by teenagers. But lockdown...

... something that I have found myself doing lately that seems to enhance the experience during lockdown; my speakers, as for most of us now I think, flank my large-screen TV and serve duty as 2-channel home theatre, and what I have taken to doing is turning off the sound on the TV and watching a visual 4K experience: one of the BBC nature programs, or youtube 4K aerial scenery of beautiful places, or even Google Chromecast set to show great artwork from the world's art galleries.

All of these things, combined with new music, help to generate a state of mind conducive to aesthetic appreciation and the addictive attentional surplus.

Doesn't mean I don't want a new pair of speakers though.

 

[krabapple]

There's a lot of smart people on this site. If I can be so bold so as to point out few observations that have not yet been addressed. The first being that "sound" is not the same as " music". Sound, by my experience only, does not reverberate or decay like a note created by the continued vibration of a vocal chord or string that has been plucked or the head of a drum etc.

Huh?

Sounds that aren't music also reverberate and decay.

 

[Cbdb2]

Sound design (with sound effects) is used constantly in movies and often replaces or adds to the music, and often has more emotional effect than the music. One of my favorite old examples is from "Natural Born Killers" where they put horses screaming in the mix during a murder scene. Ask people what they heard, they usually can't tell you, but they can tell you it was creepy. Our brain is easily fooled, particularly when the eyes are busy.

 

[Harmonie]

Sound design (with sound effects) is used constantly in movies and often replaces or adds to the music, and often has more emotional effect than the music. One of my favorite old examples is from "Natural Born Killers" where they put horses screaming in the mix during a murder scene. Ask people what they heard, they usually can't tell you, but they can tell you it was creepy. Our brain is easily fooled, particularly when the eyes are busy.

Great, you should post it on the "Golden eared" thread as well !