@snilf
Thanks for your insightful remarks. I really enjoyed reading them.
In particular, the anecdote about umami, and the various factors which enter into how we hear music (including circumstances and mood). Not only is it notoriously hard to describe what we're hearing at any given time, it's also quite difficult to control our attention so that when we listen a second (or third) time, we attend to the same particulars very closely. The mind wanders even when we try to stop it — and when we do try to stop it (e.g. fix it on, say, "that cymbal crash") we are effectively in a different state of mind (we're in a controlling state of mind, not a relaxed one).
This comment bears out for me, as well:
The most important element: quality of the original recording. Number 2: room acoustics. Number 3: speakers. After that, it’s all marginal effects. The debates about power cords, interconnects, even fuses is, well....
The way I understand the situation with many (not all) audiophiles is as follows: They're into the hobby. They want to hear changes and make improvements. But they cannot or will not listen to only well-recorded material (who can blame them) or deal with their room acoustics (practical obstacles or laziness). They also want to gear shop. So, in order to pursue the hobby, they have to exaggerate the differences made in what they can actually change. And that leads to debate of what (most will not admit) are marginal differences — compared to the ones which will really change things.
@falconquest --
Each one of us is therefore unique. We simply will never perceive something, visual, auditory etc. the same way. That is why we cannot agree on "what's best" or what is the best method for determining "best".
I suppose the question becomes how we can ever agree on anything or even converse. My guess is that we are not only brains but creatures sharing a language and a culture. Thus, despite our manifold differences, we find ways to agree and disagree.
@nyev
Our subjective sensory experience IS flawed.
I know what you mean. I would use the word "fallible" and "subject to reconsideration when used as the basis for judgments."
Like you, I've made many mistakes in characterizing and evaluating what I was hearing. Talking to others and also just taking more time before judging has been the key for me. But your point is well taken.
