Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › the psychology of the musician as listener
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

the psychology of the musician as listener - Page 2

post #16 of 64
9/30/10 at 2:04pm

LOL at the pathetic stereotyping. I can tell you without hesitation, there are many musicians who are among the most difficult to please sonically. Just as there are musicians who don't really care what happens to the sound after they've produced it.

 

Compare that to audiophiles vs. other listeners, and the simplest explanation - thus the most likely - is that their population has a pretty normal distribution of listening requirements.

Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #17 of 64
9/30/10 at 3:42pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aimlink View Post

It could well be that musicians aren't as dependent on high end sound as a non-musician since they spend a lot of time right in the midst of the real thing and not a recording.  They find it easy to extrapolate and fill in the blanks.

 

I definitely agree. Being a musician, I've often wondered if they (we) better understand what a natural sound is. If there was a seasoned musician, who was also a seasoned sound engineer and audiophile, designed and engineered a pair of headphones, do you think they would sound most true to life? I think so. For instance, I owned a pair of HFI-780 for a short time, and they were the worst purchase on audio I've ever made. In the same regard, people have debated with me on how they have a very natural sound with accurate tone and timbre. Being in many musical situations, the sound of any individual instrument in real life is very easy to distinguish from almost any headphone, besides maybe the LCD-2... Other than that, there is no way any audio equipment will ever surpass live performance.
 


Edited by clarinetman - 9/30/10 at 3:45pm
Reply
post #18 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:31pm
Thread Starter 

You seem to misunderstand. The whole point of "stereotype" is that no one is really a stereotype. Nor does it mean all musicians are that way. Some are. That's what leads to the notion of a stereotype.

 

I don't know what world you travel in, but I have met plenty of musicians who not only have crappy stereos, they groove on those stereos like they are super-hi-end, and even speak of them that way.


Do musicians listen in the same way as non-musicians? In general, acquiring knowledge of art changes how one appreciates art. It is entirely a different experience to listen to music HAVING SPENT 20,000 HOURS STUDYING IT AND MAKING IT vs. someone who is not a musician.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackKontney View Post

LOL at the pathetic stereotyping. I can tell you without hesitation, there are many musicians who are among the most difficult to please sonically. Just as there are musicians who don't really care what happens to the sound after they've produced it.

 

Compare that to audiophiles vs. other listeners, and the simplest explanation - thus the most likely - is that their population has a pretty normal distribution of listening requirements.

Reply
post #19 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:33pm
Thread Starter 


I definitely think musicians have twin potentials: just as they have a potential to "fill in the blanks" with their imagination, they also  have a potential to be extremely deep and sophisticated evaluators of stereos.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by clarinetman View Post


 

 

I definitely agree. Being a musician, I've often wondered if they (we) better understand what a natural sound is. If there was a seasoned musician, who was also a seasoned sound engineer and audiophile, designed and engineered a pair of headphones, do you think they would sound most true to life? I think so. For instance, I owned a pair of HFI-780 for a short time, and they were the worst purchase on audio I've ever made. In the same regard, people have debated with me on how they have a very natural sound with accurate tone and timbre. Being in many musical situations, the sound of any individual instrument in real life is very easy to distinguish from almost any headphone, besides maybe the LCD-2... Other than that, there is no way any audio equipment will ever surpass live performance.
 

Reply
post #20 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by clarinetman View Post

I definitely agree. Being a musician, I've often wondered if they (we) better understand what a natural sound is. If there was a seasoned musician, who was also a seasoned sound engineer and audiophile, designed and engineered a pair of headphones, do you think they would sound most true to life? I think so. For instance, I owned a pair of HFI-780 for a short time, and they were the worst purchase on audio I've ever made. In the same regard, people have debated with me on how they have a very natural sound with accurate tone and timbre. Being in many musical situations, the sound of any individual instrument in real life is very easy to distinguish from almost any headphone, besides maybe the LCD-2... Other than that, there is no way any audio equipment will ever surpass live performance.
 

The pesky thing about it is that I had the pleasure of reading a thread where several posters claiming to be musicians didn't have a consensus on which headphone they felt were the most natural sounding.  In fact, there were some surprisingly contrasting opinions there.  A real head spinner.  I eventually put it down to the influence of the rest of the chain.

 

So, I personally take even the musicians opinion with a grain of salt, though I do read their opinions with due respect.  For me, a natural headphone gives the occasional creeps when I think someone is in the room or I'm confusing sounds in the music from sounds in the room.

 

Reply
post #21 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:36pm
Thread Starter 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post

Though I think active participation may play a role in the enjoyment of musicians listening for pleasure, I would not consider it as the most important factor.

 

However, I think you got the core idea that musicians may internally fill in some details or compensate for inaccuracy by drawing from past experiences rather than just the sounds the system is producing. 

I call "internally filling in details" an active participation.

 

 

 

Quote:
Musicians aren't exactly a special class of people distinct from the rest.

 

When musicians are listening to a recording for study, the requirements change a little.

 

What is special about musicians is they have spent 10,000 to 30,000 hours in deep study of music-making. That changes in a very deep, unconscious, and fundamental way how you experience music.

 

 

Reply
post #22 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:39pm
Thread Starter 

I agree with all you are saying.

 

But it is necessary for some people to have high-end gear to FULLY enjoy the music if they cannot connect in a deep an unconscious way to rhythm, emotion, etc. like a seasoned musician can.

 

I am an experienced AMATEUR musician and composer and I notice the more I study music, the more I connect with. But as an AMATEUR I know I am only sensing 5% or less of what I would sense as a professional.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fallingreason View Post

I've been a musician most my life, ...

You don't need to almost feel the vocalist's breath to understand the emotion they are conveying.  Your don't need to hear the toe tapping to sense the rhythm. You don't need a vast soundstage to hear counterpoint.  These are sensory pleasures, and I feel very sorry for those who believe it is necessary to have high end gear to FULLY enjoy the music.

Reply
post #23 of 64
9/30/10 at 4:41pm
Thread Starter 

Oh --- I should clarify that I am talking exclusively about classical music, which is a type of music that benefits extensively from deep study and experience. Not all styles of music have the same depth. I'll probably get flames for that, but it's not my fault if it's true.

 

Reply
post #24 of 64
9/30/10 at 5:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1127 View Post

Oh --- I should clarify that I am talking exclusively about classical music, which is a type of music that benefits extensively from deep study and experience. Not all styles of music have the same depth. I'll probably get flames for that, but it's not my fault if it's true.

 



Agreed, not to be a snob. What do you play btw?

Reply
post #25 of 64
9/30/10 at 6:36pm

Gotta love a bunch of intellectuals that devolve a conversation into a "penis" contest.  A fallacy is that everything's a penial contest or a tour de force.  As Freud said: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

 

 

A customer of mine has two baby grands in her living room, back-to-back and records on a hundred dollar boombox.

 

 


Edited by beeman458 - 9/30/10 at 6:47pm
Reply
post #26 of 64
9/30/10 at 7:15pm
Thread Starter 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by clarinetman View Post





Agreed, not to be a snob. What do you play btw?

I played trombone in school, and since then have dabbled at the piano and composed a bit. I considered myself "experienced" because I've been making music for 30 years, but I consider myself amateur because I haven't practiced a whole lot nor done any formal study.

 

I've noticed that the more I put into study of classical music, the more I get out of it. Since I am only 1% as serious as a professional musician, I assume they get even more out of it.

 

There are some objective facts about classical music compared to some other styles. For example, in many styles of music, the rhythmic pattern stays the same throughout the piece. In Mozart, on the other hand, the underlying rhythmic pattern (the pattern not the meter) changes every couple of measures. And those changes are not random, but coherently express larger phrases, which themselves are bound into larger sections and movements. So in a Mozartian symphony there are thousands of bits of information in the rhythmic patterns alone, compared to a typical rock piece in which the rhythmic pattern changes very little or not at all.

 

A conductor might spend hundreds of hours in a career studying just one score of Mozart.

 

There's simply no comparison between that, and a non-musician's way of listening.

Reply
post #27 of 64
9/30/10 at 7:16pm
Thread Starter 


You don't have to take it literally. There is some truth to it as a metaphor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beeman458 View Post

Gotta love a bunch of intellectuals that devolve a conversation into a "penis" contest.  A fallacy is that everything's a penial contest or a tour de force.  As Freud said: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

 

 

A customer of mine has two baby grands in her living room, back-to-back and records on a hundred dollar boombox.

 

 

Reply
post #28 of 64
9/30/10 at 7:31pm

You don't have to take it literally. There is some truth to it as a metaphor.

 

Very little.

 

With all due respect, it's the idea that folks with a brain get together and everything boils down to Freud's, who's is bigger than the other's.  This, as if nobody ever got a passing grade in Psych 101 and are just discovering psychology for the first time.

 

The comment on my part was simply an observation.  The truth of the matter is, as Freud commented: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."  Makes me think of Randy Neuman and "Short People."  FWIW, music stores are filled with musical bling.

 


Edited by beeman458 - 9/30/10 at 7:33pm
Reply
post #29 of 64
9/30/10 at 7:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by beeman458 View Post

You don't have to take it literally. There is some truth to it as a metaphor.

 

Very little.

 

With all due respect, it's the idea that folks with a brain get together and everything boils down to Freud's, who's is bigger than the other's.  This, as if nobody ever got a passing grade in Psych 101 and are just discovering psychology for the first time.

 

The comment on my part was simply an observation.  The truth of the matter is, as Freud commented: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."  Makes me think of Randy Neuman and "Short People."  FWIW, music stores are filled with musical bling.

 

 

 

Passing grade and actual comprehension are two very different things. Are you referring to penis envy? With an apparent understanding of Psychoanalysis like that, you might want to return to college. Juuuuust kidding :P. 

 

On a more related note, being a musician is a double edged sword.

 

As both a drummer and "audiophile" it is hard to be fully happy with either camps.

 

You have the crazy good music being recorded on garbage, and people listening like garbage on really good equipment. 

 

What it boils down to is they are more interested in music production, and not its reproduction. Musicians understand music and its patterns much better, and more innately than a non musician, and there are many ways in which they are simply superior to a non listener. At this point there is little room for arguing, because a trained brain is biologically better, faster, more precise, and advanced than a non trained brain could ever be.

 

That being said, they do seem to settle for some lack luster playback equipment. They don't look discontent to me though. iPod ear buds are all some need, and probably due to the fact their brain is so trained it can make up for lots of the short comings. The fact they understand the music so much better might mean they need far less to work with for enjoyment, and that seems to be the case. I don't doubt they could enjoy some nice speakers or headphones, but they simply don't crazy it the way others do.

 

Either party can venture and become both, and an Ideal combo in my mind, but musicians are clearly the better listeners. Stuff like that happens when people spend time practicing, learning theory and participating in music, and others put shiny rocks on their 10k CD player to try and add "more air"...


Edited by sokolov91 - 9/30/10 at 7:59pm
Reply
post #30 of 64
9/30/10 at 8:22pm

sokolov91 wrote:

 

Either party can venture and become both, and an Ideal combo in my mind, but musicians are clearly the better listeners. Stuff like that happens when people spend time practicing, learning theory and participating in music, and others put shiny rocks on their 10k CD player to try and add "more air"...

 

And yet, without those shiny rock people, musicians won't have an audience.

 

Currently listening to Stevie Ray Vaughn.  I enjoy and appreciate each and every note being played.

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › the psychology of the musician as listener