wrote
Eddie's about blow his top again:

EddieM Jun 13, 3:18 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: "EddieM" - Find messages by this author
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 19:18:39 GMT
Local: Mon,Jun 13 2005 3:18 pm
Subject: Listener training...
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

wrote
EddieM still doesn't get it:




PD the OP comments regard the effect of listening training
program to the conscious awareness in discerning particular
differences among musical sounds. McKelvy is talkin about the
difficulty faced by experienced listener to enjoy music when
listening between an inferior and grander system.


Because, IMO when you listen to good equipment you have been
trained on what to listen for. You learn the differences between
inferior and superior playback. [...]


You mean to say that the listening training program proposed by your
best friend, Arny, teaches you to learn the difference between inferior
against superior playback ? You need a training 'program' for that ?

I"m saying it teaches you how to listen for differences, better than
you would be able to without the training.


Are you actually saying that Arny's training program, to which the OP
referred to, solely advocate that listener simply listen to superior
playback against inferior playback system and learn from there?


Anyway, could you please explain without sounding too evasive why you
added a buncha nonsensical, useless headers above yet, went on to hid
and deleted a rather short and simple question I had ask previously
which is:

Do you need a training program to teach you what violins should sound
like ?

How does the training program go about teaching you what a violin
should sounds like -- firsthand?


I don't know if it necessary, but it is something that happens when you
listen to more accurate playback. Every audio publication I've ever
seen provides lists of music types and artists that they feel will help
you better evaluate an audio system. In so doing, they are asking you
to train yourself on how and what to listen for. Are such lists
subversive? How is training detremental if it helps you better evalute
an audio system?


They're are telling us to listen to well engineered musical recordings
of various types and artist. Now go on tell me what your sidekick,
Arny, wants me to do under his propose 'listener training program.

Listen better.


So that's it ? Arny's 'listening training program' consist of asking me
to sit in front of an exceptional playback system along with well
engineered musical recordings ................ and listen better?

Either you and Arny are bull****ting each other or, you truly enjoy
licking your idol's butt to cover his ass.



It's the act of listening to better systems that trains one in how to
listen. If you hear better playback, you hear things you never heard
from a lesser system.


This is what High-End magazines such as TAS and SP, to
name just a few, seem to put accross. I'm glad you agree with them.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. To bad you're not a stopped
clock.


Isn't that what the HE mags been saying all along?


It would seem that you and PD consider education, to be detrimental.


I don't know what you mean.

Finally something we can agree on.

I listen to better system as much as I can
with good recordings.

Why? Aren't you afraid you'll get trained on how to listen better by
being exposed to better playback?

Your replies don't make sense.