If you listen to what everyone plays, and how the tune is pieced together, then gear quickly becomes an irritating factor.
First of all, using speakers and the standard bases for stereo, there is only a one dimensional reproduction, by definition. It is a straight line. running left to right. I know how the sensation is, when apparently the speakers disappear, and all that, still, this is the physics of it.
Listening for soundstage is thus a strange thing to do. Soundstage is supposed to be this great thing about the HD800, which I happen to use for hours every day. There is only left to right, for classic stereo recordings. That left to right is not really that much wider than other cans I own. At best, it is academic in nature.
Then there is imaging. That is how precicely the sounds are placed on the soundstage. If used correctly, the HD800 is a pure joy for that. It makes everything so much more fun.
As separation is insane with HD800, and the imaging is really great, listening for what the different voices sing, is so easy. There is the usual dubbing, in which the main singer, does his own backing vocals. Trying to separate them, and the rest of the instruments, makes me appreciate what I am actually listening to, and how it is actually played.
The there is articulation. The more details reproduced, in the right way, the more natural sounding a voice or instrument becomes. A great reproduction, as in great articulation, of voices, particularly female, make music a pure escape for me. Writing this, I am listening to Sia, and my HD800 make me drift like nothing else I have ever tried listening to.
Precision, well to me, that is how tight and accurate the sound is reproduced. Particularly perk, as in drums, sound like a rumble, when lacking precision. It differ from articulation, as this is about how precise the reproduction is of what is being reproduced. The base might not extend that deep, but what is reproduced might be precise.
There is something called transparent, but to me, that is not a core sonic trait. It it is tight in imaging, has great separation, great articulation, and tight precision, it will be transparent to me.
I actually really dig attack. To me, that is about how hard hitting a drum might be reproduced, particularly perk, like cymbals. Hitting metal, well, it is a hard hitting sound. To me, that is just a part of precision. Something I listen for, to quickly get an idea what listening experience to expect from the gear at hand.
To me, gear always is limiting the music enjoyment. In some way. When a tune is supposed to rock, but all the pieces that builds that expression is lost on the gear reproduction, sorry, a greater part is lost. It is not possible to enjoy what is not there.
Also, a classic test is to relax, and see what happens to your listening. The HD800 has a tendency to make me focus on the details, on the parts, the parts that make the whole. This is typically described as analytical cans, because of that. (It used to by the way, people evolve with their gear.)
My MM500 Denons, make me drift more into the harmonies, the forest, not the trees. That sort of rendering is typically called warm, some even call it natural. I use them Denons less and less, as there is simply so much missing, while using them. This is a typical trait of warm rendering in general. As opposed the HD800, there is simply so much missing, that most tunes is rendered as something completely different, as a piece of music. It is OK for what it is, and would have been just fine if this was what ever had known. I would still enjoy the music.
Would a musician typical be able to describe sound rendering like this: NO. He would not even be close. He would pick up a HD800, and will be able to listen to each instrument with ease. He would thus turn to the HD800 for that, and that is in fact what happens a lot, in the real world. That does not mean that he can quantify and articulate why that is. This is more organic for most musicians, and their attempts to describe sound reproduction is typically not analytical at all. They speak of warm rendering of a mic, but what constitutes a warm rendering? Picking apart "warm", leaves out the warmth. As analyzing any emotion would, and as is the very aim in much of psychological treatment. Analyzing an emotion kills it. If warmth cannot be felt, it cannot be conveyed.
Listening, is to me a mental and soul searching exercise. There are a bunch of different ways to listen to music. jmills8 seem to go for absorbing the music. The typical organic view. Feel the music. It is amazing how much of that feel that even a kitchen radio may render. This might even be done introvert or extrovert. Some drift into a dream like state, not moving at all. I for one, might stamp the beat, snapping fingers, shaking my head, even on the subway. If you ever ride a Norwegian subway, you would instantly realize how socially insane my behavior is. To me, dancing is an extreme form of listening. You do not feel the music, until you move to it. At least for some tunes. Sure, all of this can be improved upon. I definitely should snap my fingers more on the subway, probably should move a lot more to the music, which would cement me as a loony for every other traveler, but who cares? It is just "critical listening" right?
As to listen to gear, to describe its ability, there are distinct traits of sound reproduction, that emphasizes the different form of listening. As any musician would tell you: There is no one correct sound, not for music. But if you know how to analyze the pieces, know a bit about harmonies, then analyzing a can is not that hard. Some dig deep, like me, and pick apart the sound into very small pieces. But you can see the trees in a forest, the internal of every freaking tree is not that important, at least most of the time.
Some feel that a particular set of cans renders a rough expression, that actually, in their experience, enhances the expression of for instance rock. The render is raw, but not precise. If all you need is a can to enjoy rock, it is not needed to be able to analyze the sound any further. You got what you need.
So, would it be smart for everyone to dig any deeper than that? No. Critical depends on both what is sought, and your positional.
I once talked with someone owning a three way speaker setup. Expensive as $h!..., well you got the picture. I told him about the physics of speaker reproduction, and the main flaws of his speakers. A sound is reproduced basically by the plane drawn between the listeners ears, and the speakers. It is dead flat, there is no height. That result in the highs being rendered physically higher than the mids, while base is typically not well space positioned by humans, but the part that is, would be even lower. The result? Well, while playing metal strings, on the guitar, sound that is really a single point in the soundstage, is rendered as climbing in height through its range. The sound of the hand work is usually clearly above the base strings of the guitar. Or the sounds like hitting the guitar, to add a beat. This guy that I talked to got upset, that once he knew this, he could not unhear it anymore. His experience was ruined.
Sure, if you want to evolve as a listener, and need to really understand this in dept and with high skill, you are in for a rough ride. There are so many flat out dumb conceptions as to what sound reproduction is, like 3D rendering by stereo speakers, that real critical listening ends up being a really socially challenging task. People have their opinions, and simply gets angry, if you challenge them. Like this "objectivists boardroom". It you share critical listening experiences with them, they will tell you that you are wrong, even before you finish your sentence. They will tell you that you are fooled by your senses, even without knowing anything about the nature of your listening, nor your core argument. That might come off as rude or strange, but that is actually how most people react to really critical listening, as such listening result in conflict with a lot of pre-conceptions.
To me, the sound quality of Spotify is poor, but good enough for most people to love the music that is on there. That is why I typically points people there, rather than Tidal HiFi. If they do not hear all the compression imperfections, and still loves the music, what is really the harm? Good enough, is good enough. There are more important things in this world to worry about.
I end this long piece actually snapping fingers to "The Look (Original Mix)" by Cedric Gevais. Using my HD800. Simply put, I have never heard a more tight and thus funky reproduction of that tune, than by my own gear. I know every little instrument by heart, every sound by heart. Nothing beats a hard hitting super tight beat (pun intended). Yep, I am really digging house techno on my HD800. It is so bloody insane, I have to stop writing, as I find myself snapping fingers to that insane tune. Oh, and I only know of one cable for my cans, that makes that a joy, and that is the Heimdal 2. Completely immeasurable by any machine, but certainly by the level of my excitement and by a heap of distinct sonic traits. For us who knows how to critically listen for them. Knowing the trees in details, is not in conflict with enjoying the forests. At least to me. It is like loving a family, yet know every member intimately. Actually knowing my loved ones really well, makes me cherish my family so much more.
Peace, out.
