Critical listening and altered states


Ok, this is not a question about relaxing, but about listening to evaluate how the system (or a piece of gear is sounding).

What, in your experience, are the pluses and minuses of altering your state of mind for listening? This can include anything you've used to affect your everyday state of mind, from coffee, beer, scotch, tobacco, to much stronger — and psychoactive, dissociative — additives.

What do you gain by altering your consciousness in terms of what you notice, attend to, linger on, etc?
What causes more details to emerge?
What allows you to stick with a thread or, alternately, make new connections?

Or perhaps you like to keep all those things *out* of your listening; if that's you, please say a bit about why.

128x128hilde45
Post removed 
@mastering92
What do you mean by this?

there is no winning or losing in hifi. it a hobby. no race track or finish line. it’s about enjoyment of music, and/or gear. maybe building gear, or anything related. maybe it’s about collecting, or interior design. i’ve seen and known people who have all those perspectives; either singularly or together.

and being an audiophile is simply appreciating the quality of music reproduction. it’s a perspective. your circumstances do not determine your mind set. you may have limited choices for various reasons or asset allocation decisions, but perspective is free. and there are matters of taste, preference, and musical choices and living situations that push our priorities.

so we all can approach decisions with our own method. certainly i like mine and am happy to share it and the why behind it.

and i would bet if we were to sit down face to face and discuss this issue, our approaches would have much in common.
Good points.

@mastering92
To listen critically - We need to put our energy into the power of objective reasoning and honest observations.

Here’s where you and I may see things differently. I am in the field of philosophy. Every argument which is offered, and every counter-argument claims "objective reasoning." The issue becomes, what is selected as relevant to the objective argument? What is left out? What is emphasized? The history of thought (not just philosophy) is full of people who try to claim their argument is ultimate because it is objective. But that word, objective, is just stone soup. What else is in there? That’s where the interesting stuff happens. The word objective is not a trump card among people who know how to argue.

@mikelavigne
OTOH in the particular audiophile journey i am on, i am as interested in how some change makes me feel emotionally in a right brain context, as objectively what my left brain thinks it hears. am i being drawn into the music? is my body happy?
This identifies the exact way in which objectivity hits the shoals, for me. Mike is right -- this is about mind-and-body, and since listening is also done with our body, the detachment necessary for rational objectivity is insufficient if not downright destructive of what some of us consider the experience of music.



Post removed