The thing about objectivists is...


Listening is the essence and central activity of music appreciation. Listening is purely a result of the essential reality of subjectivity, and not that of any "objective reality" which is assumed to exist "out there." The human mind tends to rigidly cling to measurements, pedestrian concepts, and elaborate abstractions in attempt to simplify, subdivide, define, and categorize within the immensity of the realm of the experiential/subjective.

Over-reliance on concrete definitions and ideas serves to attach oneself to a sense of stability and security. The mind secretly hopes this will sufficiently ward off the uneasiness of feeling unsure, or off-balance, about one’s actual degree of comprehension regarding a given topic.

But what is it that is capable of registering sounds, recognition of patterns, recalling memory, and awareness? It’s pure subjectivity. It’s not the brain. That’s only an idea which is based on an entire system of definitions which define other definitions. The mind fortifies the boundaries of its interconnected structure by using circuitously self-reifying definitions.

Consider this: A description of a thing, proposed by the human mind, is only of that which a thing is not. A thing’s reality is not the same as its description.

What is it that is present in the pure silence during the instant just prior to sound waves propagating into the air space of the listening room? What is it which listens?

It’s subjective awareness, devoid of mental content. Your ideas aren’t listening, your experiential awareness is listening.

The more one thinks the same boring ideas one’s been thinking for years, the less one can listen. Subjectivity is the self-existent authority prior to the discernment of any quality, measured quantity, or the detection of that which we term "music". The deeper we can relax and sink into pure, silent subjectivity, the more deeply and purely we can listen and behold. Our subjective awareness becomes purer and less colored, our mind becomes more open and flexible, and experiential reality is seen to be the ever-present continuum which is of the greatest value of all.

128x128gladmo

@tylermunns - it's always interesting to me when I hear people talking about a system or component that will 'get their toes tapping'.  To me, it's the music that gets my toes tapping - my toes did plenty of tapping in the 60's when I listened to it on a small transistor radio, and that continues on to this day! Rhythm is rhythm.... 😁 

Proof that all audio discussions eventually degrade to cables or vinyl vs. digital.

 

Got stuck with a Jetta with the factory radio for a rental recently. It was that or who knows how long and Maui was calling.  256kbps MP3/AAC ... Really don't know, Bluetooth to the stereo, cheap electronics, cheap speakers, and tapping my fingers and toes the whole way. Mood is everything.

@nonoise Some of us care about the efficacy of language, and the meaning of words.

Using the terms “PRaT,” and “rhythm and pace,” when describing the respective qualities of various electronics and speakers, is the very definition of “nonsensical.”

Music has “rhythm,” not gear.  
As far as “pace,” goes, even for music itself, this word is pretty meaningless.  “Pace?” Uhhhhh, you mean, “tempo?”

“Timing?” I suppose, as someone else here noted, “timing” may be somewhat useful in describing “realism,” that is, communicating the sense that the signal has been processed with such efficacy as to feel the music is being played live-on-the-spot.

Rattling off the term “PRaT,” has no meaning to a laymen, and little meaning to someone who actually thinks about what the term actually means.

But I suppose being an effective communicator to the average person is not necessarily the goal; it’s much more fun for an insular group to have their own little vernacular.

 

@tylermunns ,

If you believe that, then you are in a very small minority of audiophiles who do so. Like I said before, the term PRaT has been around for decades and shouldn't even be doubted unless someone is so new to this game that they need to look it up.

If a piece of gear is/was poorly designed, then it couldn't convey the PRaT in the music, so yes, undoubtably, it's inherent in the design of the gear as the maker of said gear knows it and made sure it could reproduce it. 

It may all boil down to just being a hell of a lot more accurate but being so allows it to sound all the more realistic, and that, my friend, is in the gear and not in someone's head.

When they hear it, they recognize it, and then express it, and then people like you and others fly off the handle about it, dancing on the head of a pin. 

All the best,
Nonoise

@nonoise Fair enough.

Go nuts with your meaningless jargon, and your justification that “people have peddled this nonsense for decades, therefore it’s inherently valuable.”

Go nuts with your defense of “the rest of us swallowed this non-speak decades ago, so anyone who questions it is just a wet-behind-the-ears newbie who hasn’t learned how to properly dispense vague, insider-jargon non-speak.”

I’ll continue to use words that have meaning to describe things.