Listening Skills Part Duex: What are you listening for?


Had a few experiences lately that together were a stark reminder of something known for a long time, because I lived it myself.  

In the beginning, or at any rate going back to about 1991, I was unable to hear any difference between different CD players and DACs. Even some amplifiers, they might not sound exactly the same but I was hard pressed to say why.   

This went on for a long time. Months. Many months. Like okay a year. Whatever. During which time I was driving around hitting all the Seattle/Portland area stores listening to everything I could find. About the only difference big enough to be sure of was receivers. They for sure are crap. But even there it was hard to say exactly in what way. Just the difference there was glaring enough it was obvious this is not the way to go. But that was about it.    

All during this time of course I was reading Stereophile and studying all the reviews and building up a vocabulary of audiophile terms. The problem, seen clearly as usual only in the rear view mirror, was not really being able to match up the terminology with what I was hearing. I had words, and sounds, but without meaning, having no real link or connection between them.   

One day after yet another frustrating trip to Definitive I came home and put on my XLO Test CD and was listening to the Michael Ruff track Poor Boy when it hit me, THIS IS THAT SOUND!!!  

What sound? Good question! The better high end gear is more full and round and liquid and less etched or grainy. Poor Boy is Sheffield, all tube, and so even though being played from CD through my grainy etched mid-fi the tubey magic came through enough to trigger the elusive connection. THIS is "that sound"!  

Once triggered, this realization grew and spread real fast. In no time at all it became easy to hear differences between all kinds of things. "No time at all" was probably months, but seemed like no time at all compared to how long I was going nowhere.  

What happened? There are a near infinite number of different sonic characteristics. Attack and decay, fundamental tone, harmonic, and timbre, those were a few of the early ones I was able to get a handle on- but the list goes on and on.   

Just to go by experience, reading reviews, and talking to other audiophiles it would seem most of us spend an awful lot of time concentrating real hard on our own little list of these terms. We have our personal audiophile checklist and dutifully run down the list. The list has its uses but no matter how extensive the list becomes it always remains a tiny little blip on the infinite list of all there is.   

So what brought this to mind is recently a couple guys, several in fact, heard some of the coolest most impressive stuff I know and said....meh. Not hearing it.   

This is not a case of they prefer something else. This is not hearing any difference whatsoever. At all. None. Nada. Zip. 

Like me, back in the day, with CD.  

These are not noobs either. We're talking serious, seasoned, experienced audiophiles here. 

I'm not even sure it comes down to what they are listening for. Like me in '91, hard to know what you're listening for until you know what you're listening for.   

Which comes first?
128x128millercarbon
Lots of talk about all the same stuff as usual. For a bunch who acts so sure they get it the absence of anyone talking about how they learned to recognize new and unfamiliar sound characteristics is passing strange.

The last thread was closed when it went far off topic. Please try and stay on topic. You say you get it. Pony up.

How do you learn to recognize new characteristics?

Tell ya what. Let’s pretend there are none. Let’s pretend you are the all seeing all hearing guru. Okay. Were you always thus? Right out of the womb, was it? Or was there a learning process? If so, what was it?
I’ll admit that I said, time, experience and exposure, including exposure to the sound of real instruments informed me, as did the evolution of equipment and my ears. To some extent, we are dependent on the source material, as you appeared to acknowledge in the other thread.
What new and unfamiliar sound characteristics are you referring to? I’ve listened to everything from voodoo chants from Haiti to ancient big band cut to transcription, to some pretty serious modern vinyl 50-now. Is it "Oh, I heard a scraping noise in the background that I never heard before, therefore what?"
I’m not being facetious. I answered your question in good faith. And if my response is "same-same" and I’m not cutting any new ground, then I guess I have to ask you where you see the Promise Land? (words, of course, can’t do justice but since you seem adept at them, give it a go).

PS: I feel compelled to add that I don't pretend to "get" anything, let alone "it" but will share what experience I have. No guru status claimed. 
By simply listening to music for years and decades . Through those times from beginnings as gear evolved and it comes naturally. Its not forced or strained or fretted over. It's not some rare gift . Its memory like a reflex. Like anything it comes from experience like a good mechanic tuning a car. He knows the sound. Measurements only confirm his experience of auditory memory . If its such an importance to you to and you think there is some great skill set ... instead of passing your usual judgements, just stand and deliver it. Make your claim and expose yourself.
Most just listen with enjoyment in mind . The new characteristics expose themselves against an imbeded memory like a mothers voice. Something known to measure against.
We learn it in communicating the subtle changes in a voice
for joy and anger etc. So kind of out of the womb in way actually , yes. How much you wish to focus and interpret is purely an individual thing.

Now what about a gramophone.....
 https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rowan+atkinson+selling+stereos&view=detail&mid=AC3444C6...
I am with @whart 

hint #1 Multi track studio stuff like Year of the Cat will just lead the cat to chase own tail….re  detail, “ wow I never heard that before “ path. Fake leading edge detail….very hi fi.

A steady diet of live unamplified music in reverberant space is the path i took. Field recordings of same. Microphone selection placement, etc. Of course i had mentors and sensei, again only the humble student can abide a teacher…

for multitrack Humble yourself to the greats. Alan Parsons used….wait for it… B and W monitors to craft DsotM…. 

Measure the room, use modern tools, the RT60 target for a control room is .60 ish. Try using your tape measure for that…

One of my sensei is stopping by this weekend w a Moog analog vintage synth…..we will see first hand in the exact same acoustic space how the reference system does…. i expect we shall find some flaws, grist for the improvement mill.