Is the appeal to euphonic distortion learned?


Hi everyone,

I have been thinking a little bit about the idea of euphonic distortion. The idea that we can make an amplifier or preamplifier sound better by not being so absolutely true to the input. The common story is that by adding 2nd order harmonics the music sounds more pleasant to more people. Certainly Pass has written a great deal, and with more nuance and detail about this and makes no bones about his desire to make a good sounding, rather than well measuring product.

Lets keep this simple description of euphonic distortion for the sake of argument, or we’ll devolve into a definition game.

I’m wondering whether it is possible that this is in large part learned? For instance, if I grew up with non-euphonic amps and then was exposed to an amp with high amounts of 2nd order distortion would I like it? Is the appeal here one which you have to have learned to like? Like black coffee through a French press?

And this discussion is of course in line with my thoughts about the ear/brain learning process. That there are no absolute’s in music reproduction because we keep re-training our ears. We keep adjusting what we listen to and ultimately at some point have to decide whether the discrimination between gear makes us happier or not. (Go ahead writers, steal this topic and don't mention me again, I know who you are).
erik_squires
 As a personal aside, as a young man, for several years I attended musical events almost every night of the week, most of which were unamplified. To this day I find that while tube amps can sound pretty, they don’t sound like the live performances I attended...unless a musician used a tube instrument amp during the performance.
I'm guessing that isn't learned other than your ear is a bit more trained and you've not heard the right tube amp... yet... ?


I play bass and keyboards and from junior high through college and afterwards I played the string bass in a variety of orchestras around town, as well as jazz and folk ensembles. You'd think I would have learned the same thing as you but I didn't, I found that solid state amps of the time were simply incapable of a natural presentation. So it was the opposite 'learning' from yourself (and not discounting your experience in any way).


Since both experiences are subjective and anecdotal, is that the sort of thing we can ignore for this conversation or is that exactly what this conversation is about??


 
Note that recording studios often are the worst places to listen to instruments (unless it's a large great sounding room with good acoustics...Abby Road has one) as they're designed for recording into microphones. Many charming little pro studios manage to do recording very well, but they're not concert halls or often even good sounding rooms. Kind of not the point. These days you can carefully record things clearly and cleanly in your closet.
Someday we will begin to understand the relationship between sound waves and how the brain reacts to them. For now it seems we know
about 1/2 of 1% of what can be known. 

How do people who could not memorize 3 lines know when
a musician plays the wrong note after only hearing it once before?
Or even if they never heard it before?

Musical sounds occupy a special place in the brain that allows total recall of everything ever heard. This is fascinating to me.

The real question is whether or not someday we will have learned
how to build a sound reproduction system in a way that is
indiscernible from live music. 

We have a long way to go before that happens so do enjoy the ride!


@atmasphere , For the purposes of this discussion, and for the very reasons you suggested; please feel free to ignore the last paragraph of my previous post on this thread that began with: “As a personal aside....” I will add that my experiences suggest that what one hears from the typical audience perspective  can be quite different than what one hears from the performance band stand.