The Absurdity of it All


50-60-70 year old ears stating with certainty that what they hear is proof positive of the efficacy of analog, uber-cables, tweaks...name your favorite latest and greatest audio "advancement." How many rock concerts under the bridge? Did we ever wear ear protection with our chain saws? Believe what you will, but hearing degrades with age and use and abuse. To pontificate authority while relying on damaged goods is akin to the 65 year old golfer believing his new $300 putter is going to improve his game. And his game MAY get better, but it is the belief that matters. Everything matters, but the brain matters the most.
jpwarren58
“@kevn  - I have a couple of tracks I listen to for mids....” - perkri

Thanks so much for your reply, perkri : ) 

miijostyn, I didn’t actually describe anything, but was just asking perkri for a few more tracks he uses for his critical listening moments to determine for himself when he detects change and difference in sound quality - his reference to sibilance by way of recordings of Nina Simone was simply my way in to inquire further about other specific tracks of specific singers, you see.

However, you have raised an interesting issue for me, for which I am grateful. Of course I understand the difference between natural sibilance, recording sibilance, and sibilance due to distortion from volume control or equipment. I believe it was the very point that perkri was making in his reference to Nina Simone’s voice and the recorded voicing of it. It is these very nuances that help me understand how to listen better, and to know if what i am hearing is imagined or real, and detailed or distorted. But the more important issue of interest to me was your mention of timbre. I believe that everything that we are in dispute over regarding sound differences and the abilities of the ageing human ear to pick up nuance, has to do with our abilities to distinguish timbre. While it is considerably more obvious when played back sound is artificially sibilant, it is a lot more subtle if the sound being heard has more ‘air’ around it, more lifelike, and more right there. The lightness and ‘weight’ in the flux of the tiniest vibrations and variations in timbre is what determines the subtlest differences and improvements we hear; pure tonal frequencies, brand of speaker, cost of power cable, and indeed, almost surely even type of speaker, be damned. All that minute information can come by way of wholesale or part change of equipment, and by extension, the smallest changes of tweaks, in room and all else that connects the signal path. And as the sensitive instrument the entire human body is, I do not believe it is only the eardrum that collects this infinite amount of timbral information. Are there some aspects of sound that cannot be measured definitely, but can be experienced? I am not able to say one way or another. But I do know my ears, body, and mind are still good enough to learn how to understand listening better ; )

In friendship - kevin


Very good post thanks...

Human voice timbre is the most well known and perceived musical and sound object...

It is the only way to fine tuned a system....Using it....
Back when I was 18 a concert wasn't good until I couldn't hear,a sound concert, then riding the NYC subway home....well now I have ,I'm told hearing loss.....what ,no way.....
Everyones ears are including ones  left and Right are Different
All Audio Judgement is based on What your ears can actually Hear, Training and Knowledge.
I am a 66 year old Musician and Audio enthusiast.
I have well worn and Trained ears.
I have worked at Playing Live and in Studio.
I worked with Live and Studio sound and worked at a Hi End Home speaker manufacturer.
I judge but what my Ears Like to Hear.


Post removed 
More to discover