Thank you joc3021-- good points above with which I agree!
Your first one was about someone being in the mood, etc.
The second was walking into the confirming-biases trap.
To get out of that trap, the following has helped me:
Whenever a change is made in the system or gear, I listen always for increased nuance in HOW each and any note is being expressed, being phrased, being sung.
No matter the music, no matter the recording's quality, and relying on many recordings I've come to know really well, of one-in-a-million artist(s), often recorded live.
Then I ask if someone right there could hear 'that' when I pointed 'it' out? Not a judgment call.
As I was not at the original event, my reasoning is based on the following:
- A one-in-a-million artist has included many nuances I have yet to hear.
- Artists know most of us can hear these nuances, because when they are practicing, the results are visible in all the nearby faces listening up close and personal- just as recording mics will be placed.
- Artists put in these nuances because whenever we do hear 'them', that helps us 'feel' whatever the artists are bringing forth.
So I think improving a system must include getting it to resolve more nuance, no matter the music or recording. It will be a more 'musical' system. 'Things', expressions, flow along better, which is a time-domain issue, not a tonal-domain issue for designers.
You wish these nuances to be obvious, to get your attention quickly, because this leads to feeling better soon, even when you're in a dour mood.
Thank you for following along. See any flaws in this logic? Let me know your thoughts.
Y'all have a great weekend!
