Do We Generally Hear the Same or Differently?

[Ron Resnick]

We see so much talking past each other on the forum and mutual misunderstanding and disagreements and conflicts and inability to achieve consensus that one may end up dejected that since we all hear differently and we all have different philosophical objectives for the hobby (my personal favorite ax to grind) and we all have different personal tastes in sound and different personal tastes in music that we can never agree on anything. It is easy to devolve into nihilism.

Yet when audiophiles get together in person there often is strong agreement about what we are hearing. And even in a group of several people there rarely are several different perceptions -- there might be two views of different members of a group. But often, in person, I find that people agree with what they are all hearing.

So why does consensus and agreement often appear to difficult in writing but commonplace in person?

My personal view is that because it is difficult to ascribe sonic meanings to words, and because different audio terms mean different things to different people, it is difficult on-line to understand what each of us is writing and difficult to understand the meanings of the things we write. But in person where we do not have to achieve intelligibility and mutual understanding in words, and we can simply process in situ and in real-time what we are hearing, much of the communication difficulties melt away. Given the subjectivities of the hobby and the individualism and idiosyncrasies of each of our respective pairs of ears and sonic preferences and hobby objectives I find it gratifying how much agreement we often achieve when listening together in person!

 

[cjfrbw]

Perceptions do vary from person to person. With vision, not everybody has the same ability to perceive depth, for instance, and there is color blindness. There are genetic differences on people's ability to smell and taste. As the science pundits have stated, the sensory organs themselves aren't that great, but the brain computers that interpret are amazing, and not everybody has the same computer.

So, yeah, amidst the audiophile Tower of Babble is the added confusion of different perceptual mechanisms from person to person. Most discussions assume all people hear the same and with the same acuity.

What do you say to somebody with perfect pitch, hearing from 5-25Khz, and an absolute memory for music that is comparable to a photographic memory?

I saw a you tube vid of a guy (probably on the spectrum) who chain smoked and had the jacket of every vinyl record he owned memorized, down to where the cuts were on the record and the info, and he had a LOT of records.

Another was of a guy years ago who had such a prodigious knowledge of music, he could look at the grooves on a vinyl record and tell you what the music was without label or jacket.

 

[DaveyF]

Perhaps it’s not that we all hear differently, perhaps it’s because we all value different things in sound reproduction.
Is it distortion or is it music...possibly one mans music is another’s distortion.
To add to this...how many ladies do we know in the hobby, yet it is well known that the ladies can hear a lot better into the high frequencies than us guys....hmmm.

 

[Al M.]

Perhaps it’s not that we all hear differently, perhaps it’s because we all value different things in sound reproduction.

I think it is both. And it's not just what we value from sound reproduction, it is also that we want different things from music. Some, like me, want drama and excitement from music and not 'relaxation', some others' preferences partially or entirely shift more toward relaxation. System preferences will very much reflect that.

 

[bonzo75]

To start with, let's establish what differently is...it is not about whether I can hear a bit more higher frequency than you a bit more nuance than you. It is about, do you and I prefer totally different things?

In your case, I know you have tried a lot of horns, agree what they do well, and prefer something else. In the case of Peter, Ian, etc, I know they have not heard horns. There is no preference difference here. Same with many people who argue about Carts A vs B, most of them are just stating what they own, rather than establishing if they have exposure to the other carts. This is further complicated by incorrect set up and listening in different contexts.

When 2 or 3 audiophiles are listening in the same room, they are usually listening to the same perfections or imperfections, and the same audition music. They are also following the same process of listening, e.g. when I am visiting, I am doing the A vs B in a certain manner. So the same night and day differences are clearly audible to all, making it easy to agree. Problem happens when one of them has separately heard something at a show, or has predefined design notions, or is listening to electronica instead of classical, and has heard only one of the component in question. Then we disagree over forums. There are also many people I have visited who are just not interested in the process...they have opinions, but they care two hoots whether they verify them or not. They usually come to these listening sessions and have beer and discuss politics and tell us what they think.

Yes...there are cases where you can both agree on what you hear, e.g. differences between Koetsu and Lyra, and then each can prefer a separate one. We have to separate preference from hearing

 

[PeterA]

I often think we agree while visiting others because it is more polite. And the guest should never insult the host, especially if they do not know each other. On the other hand, in our audio group, we are often quite frank and open about our observations. Sometimes we share our impressions in the spirit of helping each other learn something, or hear it in a different way. There are also cases when the host has worked really hard on some improvement or change to his system and the excitement is infectious. In these cases, I tend to simply go along with the impressions rather than ruin the mood or dampen his spirits. These are often matters of human behavior and exchanges which affect how we interact with each other during these listening sessions.

I recently had a new visitor over to hear my system. We had a good time followed by dinner, but he barely said anything about the sound of my system. I think he was just being polite rather. He seemed to not want to point out stuff he did not like. These social interactions can be complicated and may even matter more than our actual differences in listing abilities, levels of experience, and hearing acumen. A lot also depends on how well we know each other and how comfortable we are with being candid.

It's a great thread Ron, but I think we will be well served to follow Kedar's advice and try to agree first on some definitions and what we are actually trying to discuss. Oh, boy.

 

[Iamrael]

...or perhaps simply the result of social setting.

 

[cjfrbw]

I recently had a new visitor over to hear my system. We had a good time followed by dinner, but he barely said anything about the sound of my system. I think he was just being polite rather. He seemed to not want to point out stuff he did not like.

It could just be about paradigm shift. I have actually heard stuff better, but just didn't recognize it for a while. It took my brain apparatus a while to clue into it that it was excellent, just not in a way I was used to.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Yet when audiophiles get together in person there often is strong agreement about what we are hearing. And even in a group of several people there rarely are several different perceptions -- there might be two views of different members of a group. But often, in person, I find that people agree with what they are all hearing. (...)

This collective agreement was studied before - it is not valid. It is why audio judgments should be carried and expressed individually, without any influence of a second person.

But yes, many audiophiles love the comfort of a second opinion that agrees with them ...

 

[microstrip]

(...) It's a great thread Ron, but I think we will be well served to follow Kedar's advice and try to agree first on some definitions and what we are actually trying to discuss. Oh, boy.

Peter,

Our bigger disagreements have always been in the definitions ... Try defining "hearing" |

 

[bonzo75]

This collective agreement was studied before - it is not valid. It is why audio judgments should be carried and expressed individually, without any influence of a second person.

But yes, many audiophiles love the comfort of a second opinion that agrees with them ...

You are talking about completely different things.

 

[bonzo75]

I often think we agree while visiting others because it is more polite. And the guest should never insult the host, especially if they do not know each other. On the other hand, in our audio group, we are often quite frank and open about our observations. Sometimes we share our impressions in the spirit of helping each other learn something, or hear it in a different way. There are also cases when the host has worked really hard on some improvement or change to his system and the excitement is infectious. In these cases, I tend to simply go along with the impressions rather than ruin the mood or dampen his spirits. These are often matters of human behavior and exchanges which affect how we interact with each other during these listening sessions.

I recently had a new visitor over to hear my system. We had a good time followed by dinner, but he barely said anything about the sound of my system. I think he was just being polite rather. He seemed to not want to point out stuff he did not like. These social interactions can be complicated and may even matter more than our actual differences in listing abilities, levels of experience, and hearing acumen. A lot also depends on how well we know each other and how comfortable we are with being candid.

It's a great thread Ron, but I think we will be well served to follow Kedar's advice and try to agree first on some definitions and what we are actually trying to discuss. Oh, boy.

Peter, politeness is a different aspect. For example, if I come to your place, I am not going to tell you your system sucks in case I don't like it. And I am not talking about agreement/disagreement at that level. However, I expect that if you set up the Zyx, and if we hear it with your LPs, in your system, we will both agree on how you described it sounds. Now, it is quite possible I will disagree with you on how it sounds in another system, set up by somebody else, or on some other music. I seriously doubt someone with a reasonable sense of hearing, and open to hearing differences, will not hear one thing dark while the other one is not hearing it as dark in that same system on those same audition LPs. If one cart sounds thin compared to the other, all will hear that. Whether they agree on liking that thinness or darkness is a different thing. Most of the arguments on the forums happen because people are listening to things set up differently, and in many cases, the reference points have nothing in common.

 

[microstrip]

You are talking about completely different things.

No, they are much more related than you can imagine.

 

[c1ferrari]

Trained listeners, it would occur to me, are more likely to articulate what they "heard" in a more uniform manner.

 

[RogerD]

Most of the time statements are made that agree with my experiences in expressing what listeners are hearing. Which tells me I moving in the right direction.
Being able to listen to a system should break any language barrier I would think. There are many degrees of different attributes of sound, but most long time audiophiles know good sound when they hear it,even years later.

 

[JackD201]

I believe we all hear similarly, it's in how we listen that we differ.

 

[GaryProtein]

We DEFINITELY hear things differently, especially above 4000 Hz.

Aside from the neural integrity of the cochlea and presence or lack of all the hairs that are supposed to be there, the anatomy of our ear canals is also a major factor in how we hear.

Testing my ear canal statement is very easy. Play whatever music you like that has the full range of frequencies, then holding your arms above your head, reach down and firmly pull upward and slightly backward on the pinnae of your ears. Listen for 5-10 seconds. This stretches and slightly straightens the external auditory meatus. Then without moving your arms away (which could change the perception of the sound) just let go of your ears. You will notice a significant change in the high end. Pulling upward you will hear more treble than when you let go.

I have done this experiment with several people and they all have this finding.

 

[JackD201]

We DEFINITELY hear things differently, especially above 4000 Hz.

Aside from the neural integrity of the cochlea and presence or lack of all the hairs that are supposed to be there, the anatomy of our ear canals is also a major factor in how we hear.

Testing my ear canal statement is very easy. Play whatever music you like that has the full range of frequencies, then holding your arms above your head, reach down and firmly pull upward and slightly backward on the pinnae of your ears. Listen for 5-10 seconds. This stretches and slightly straightens the external auditory meatus. Then without moving your arms away (which could change the perception of the sound) just let go of your ears. You will notice a significant change in the high end. Pulling upward you will hear more treble than when you let go.

I have done this experiment with several people and they all have this finding.

Yet, if you put those people in a room and blindfold them, they can carry on a conversation, begin to identify each other as male or female and eventually identify each other specifically. They'll be able to pick up on emotional states. Do that to choir members, tell them to sing, they'll end up doing harmonies. So there's different and there's DIFFERENT. I don't think your "different" is what I was referring to which is a baseline.

 

[tima]

We hear very similarly.

We have different tastes and preferences. I might be comfortable with the language of a musician and you might be comfortable with the language on an audiophile, but once we sort that out, we'll be able to communicate about what we hear.

Even if you dislike classical music, we'll both point at the same spot when asked where the timpani are located in a soundfield. We'll both be able to differentiate between the initial strike and its reflection off the back wall. While you might be able to tell that one timp is tuned to an A and the other a D, I'll be able to at least tell that there are two with different tonality and we'll both know we're not hearing a clarinet. We'll both be able to differentiate quarter-time from waltz-time even if neither of us knows what that is. We can both hear the difference between stacatto and pizacato. If we hear a Steinway and a Bosendorfer, we can probably agree that one sounds warmer than the other. You may prefer the Bosendorfer for Prokoviev and I may prefer the Steinway. But we can talk to one another about those hearings without confusion.

 

[bonzo75]

We hear very similarly.

We have different tastes and preferences. I might be comfortable with the language of a musician and you might be comfortable with the language on an audiophile, but once we sort that out, we'll be able to communicate about what we hear.

Even if you dislike classical music, we'll both point at the same spot when asked where the timpani are located in a soundfield. We'll both be able to differentiate between the initial strike and its reflection off the back wall. While you might be able to tell that one timp is tuned to an A and the other a D, I'll be able to at least tell that there are two with different tonality and we'll both know we're not hearing a clarinet. We'll both be able to differentiate quarter-time from waltz-time even if neither of us knows what that is. We can both hear the difference between stacatto and pizacato. If we hear a Steinway and a Bosendorfer, we can probably agree that one sounds warmer than the other. You may prefer the Bosendorfer for Prokoviev and I may prefer the Steinway. But we can talk to one another about those hearings without confusion.

Fantastically written, and very precise.