Nietzsche and Runaway Audio Consumption

As is often the case with aphoristic works, it can be helpful to look at the context of the given particular passage. In aphorism 302, Nietzsche writes: "The truly unendurable...are those who, possessing freedom of mind [freiheit der Gesinnung; "freedom of opinion" might be better], fail to notice that they lack freedom of taste and spirit [Geschmacks- und Geistes-Freiheit]" And aphorism 317, entitled "Possessions possess," states: "It is only up to a certain point that possessions make men more independent and free; one step further—and the possessions become master, the possessor a slave...." 

But I'm also reminded, in the context here, of a passage in Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf (coincidentally, asvjerry above mentions Steppenwolf "the band"). Late in the novel, the narrator "Harry" encounters Mozart in a "magical theater" drug-induced reverie. If I remember correctly (it's been 40 years since I read the book), they're listening to Don Giovanni on a radio together, and Harry disparages it for its poor sound quality (the novel was published in 1927). But Mozart emphatically disagrees! He loves the new technology, and loves his music reproduced by it.

There are maybe two lessons in this scene. First, that the technology of music reproduction is itself a wonderful art, and nothing to be disparaged, even when it is primitive. But second, that the music should be the master, not the technology. Returning to Nietzsche, our possessions can possess us when we obsess over trivialities. For a possession like an audio system, it's a sad irony that such obsession can too easily rob us of the love of music that it exists to promote.

Thanks, hilde45. How do you happen to be reading Nietzsche? (BTW, when asked what a new composer should do, Richard Strauss answered: "Read Nietzsche!")

And thanks, sns, for your insightful questions. They express my dilemma, which is what drew me into this thread—and other threads on this forum. High-end equipment reviews very often praise a piece of audio equipment by saying that it disappears: the speakers under review are successful when they "vanish into the music," when one "stops listening to the system" and becomes immersed in the music. I suspect we would all endorse such praise, and aspire to it in our own systems.

And yet...I wonder. I can only speak for myself, of course, but too often my pleasure in listening comes not from the music itself, but from the reproduction of it. The proof of this is that I will often choose to listen to something that is well-recorded even if it is musically banal, and I privilege good recordings over good performances in most cases (although there are fortunately lots of good performances that are also well-recorded). Bottom line: I love the equipment, especially when it seems to "disappear"! This is a paradox.

Maybe, as sns suggests, this is due to some "corruption" of real passion for music by "the need for material goods." I'm also a musician (cello and guitar), and I know a lot of musicians; none of them—literally, none—are audiophiles. Why is that? And I've had profound experiences with music in very compromised acoustical situations. How can that be, if SQ is the be-all and end-all?

@snilf Now you're heading in the direction of Benjamin's "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction".

The gear cannot disapear, the room cannot disapear but they could be used optimally, anyway the gear and room disapear completely only with very few high audio grade recording and with the right gear in the right room, otherwise we create simply an habit to live with we have already...

The best system cannot make most average recording miraculously "audiophile recording one"....The gear here do not disapear BUT REVEAL all acoustic tags and cues from the original event and the choices which have been made by the recording engineer... ...

A good system, even at low cost like mine, could, when the system/room is acoustically well controlled , reveal all acoustical chosen trade -off from ALL recordings..Then this is not only the so well recorded albums which become interesting BUT ALL RECORDINGS by the way we perceive them now in a new revealing acoustic light so to speak... Then when the room acoustic is optimallly controlled we listen to all our recordings for the music and not for a "good sound" coming from very few audiophile recording of choice....People listen to their best recorded album mainly only because their gear/room CANNOT reveal the original takes of the recording engineer...

Acoustic settings is the greatest of all upgrade ....It makes all album not on par with one another on all counts for sure, but it makes all of them acoustically interesting and there is no more a wall between the sound and the music...

There is no corruption of music by love of sound... There is an unending unsatisfaction by ignorance of the way to embed optimally a system in his mechanichal, electrical and acoustical dimensions...Then the upgrading deceptive road is chosen...

If i am not right, why am i satisfied by my low cost system ? After years working with the SAME GEAR in these three working dimensions, with what some uninformed called "tweaks" and which i call embeddings controls methods, am I deaf?

Like see N. we are free to create our own source of joy by our own hand and with minimal skills and basic acoustic science...Music and sound become ONE.....

One thing though is true, we dont need an audio system to be glad with music , when i was 14 years old i was in ectasy with the first battery radio and bad plugs in ear....Then we must learn how to use the gear to go back to the essential : simplicity...Not ascetism...Simplicity...

Art is a human gesture if not it is an empty sums of objects ....

😊😊😁😁😁😁😁😊😊

And yet...I wonder. I can only speak for myself, of course, but too often my pleasure in listening comes not from the music itself, but from the reproduction of it. The proof of this is that I will often choose to listen to something that is well-recorded even if it is musically banal, and I privilege good recordings over good performances in most cases (although there are fortunately lots of good performances that are also well-recorded). Bottom line: I love the equipment, especially when it seems to "disappear"! This is a paradox.

Maybe, as sns suggests, this is due to some "corruption" of real passion for music by "the need for material goods." I’m also a musician (cello and guitar), and I know a lot of musicians; none of them—literally, none—are audiophiles. Why is that? And I’ve had profound experiences with music in very compromised acoustical situations. How can that be, if SQ is the be-all and end-all?

1. the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless.

    

   Is this not the essence of Neitzsche?