How do you judge your system's neutrality?

hi byron:

my point is simple:

if you enjoy a stereo system while listening to music, you won't enjoy it any more by analyzing it.

unless one is a reviewer, the analytical mode is often an academic excercise with little reference to the satisfaction one attains from listening to music.

any attempt to judge the attributes of a stereo system ususually does not enhance the pleasure one gets from listening to music in general.

while reviewers assess the merits of stereo sysytems, i question the utility of such an endeavor for serious listeners.

obviously if you don't like the sound of your stereo system, it may be useful to determine the reason.

if you enjoy a stereo system while listening to music, you won't enjoy it any more by analyzing it...any attempt to judge the attributes of a stereo system usually does not enhance the pleasure one gets from listening to music in general. while reviewers assess the merits of stereo sysytems, i question the utility of such an endeavor for serious listeners.

Mrtennis - I disagree that the "analysis" of music playback cannot enhance a person's enjoyment of it. But even if that were true, or we agree for the sake of argument that it is true, I would ask: Why can't analysis be valuable even if it is irrelevant to listening enjoyment? For many people, "analysis" as you call it, or what I think of as the exploration of ideas, is an end in itself, not requiring further "utility" to be valuable. For many people, it brings its own kind of enjoyment. And those who don't enjoy the exploration of ideas are not compelled to participate. There are many threads on Audiogon that are irrelevant to my interests, so I simply ignore them. You find the exploration of ideas irrelevant to your interest of listening enjoyment. What I find odd is that you regard it as irrelevant, but do not treat it as irrelevant.

Having said that, I disagree that the exploration of ideas cannot enhance listening enjoyment. The most obvious way in which analysis can enhance listening enjoyment is when analyzing your system results in decisions to change components in a way that is more consistent with your preferences, thereby enhancing your enjoyment. It seems to me that this is by far the most common form of "analysis" on Audiogon. You seem to agree with this to some extent, as is reflected in your comment that "obviously if you don't like the sound of your stereo system, it may be useful to determine the reason." But you mention this almost in passing, as though it were a small consideration for audiophiles, rather than one of their central concerns. What makes your dismissive attitude toward analysis all the more puzzling is the number of threads you yourself have initiated on Audiogon, with titles like:

-What is good sound?
-Hardware or software: Which is more important?
-Minimize ambiguity when describing audio components
-What is the difference between good and bad sound?
-Neutrality and transparency: What’s the difference?

All of these seem to fall clearly within the category of "analysis." But to return to the point...

There are other ways in which analysis, or the exploration of ideas, can enhance listening enjoyment. In an earlier post, I mentioned that there is an abundance of evidence from the cognitive sciences that the development of concepts enhances the development of expert perception. I would now add that the development of expert perception enhances listening enjoyment. And if that is true, then the development of concepts enhances, if only indirectly, listening enjoyment.

In addition, I would like to point out: What enhances enjoyment varies from person to person. For some, the pleasure of listening to Mozart is enhanced by knowing something about Mozart's life. For others, those facts are irrelevant to their enjoyment of his music. To make the point a different way: It enhances my enjoyment to listen to music in complete darkness. For another person this may be irrelevant. The point is that what enhances enjoyment varies from person to person, and to assume otherwise leads to false generalizations.

I hope this makes apparent the value of "analysis," namely, that it is the process by which ideas are discovered. And in my view, the discovery of ideas is both an end in itself and a means for further enrichments.

Bryon, several posts back you raise interesting points by distinguishing between perceptions and preferences, while acknowledging their interrelatedness. You suggest that perception and preference are fungible characteristics that both evolve through educated listening, and that preference follows perception, albeit at a slower rate of change. You maintain that there are fewer differences in perception between educated listeners than is generally remarked. Through educated listening, divergences of preference may ultimately represent shared but differently weighted perceptions.

My sense is that listeners who have moved through the arc of lots of equipment generally experience "progress" in their evolution, and look back on past components with an admission that the process was a journey of perception and taste, rather than a random sensory experience. One would like to believe that perception is on the leading edge of preference. There is enough logical positivism in the process to suggest science, and enough metaphysics to justify continued purchases.

Bryon - Analyzing or not is a personal preference but we disagree about something different - your believe that more neutral system will sound better and more diverse to most of the people.

Sounding better and sounding neutral are two completely different things.

"Sounding better and sounding neutral are two completely different things."

Assuming that one accepts common usage in critical vocabulary that "neutral" means "uncolored," can you suggest a better term than neutral to describe the experience of "better"?