An Explanation of the Term "Suspension of Disbelief"

[Ron Resnick]

I asked ChatGPT the question:

In the subjective hobby of high-end audio what is the meaning of "suspension of disbelief"?


ChatGPT responded:

In the subjective hobby of high-end audio, "suspension of disbelief" refers to the phenomenon where an individual, typically an audiophile or music enthusiast, experiences a level of immersion and emotional engagement in the music that goes beyond the technical aspects of the audio system. It's a term borrowed from the world of literature and drama, where audiences willingly set aside their skepticism about the fictional aspects of a story to fully immerse themselves in the narrative.

In the context of high-end audio, suspension of disbelief occurs when the listener becomes so engrossed in the musical experience that they forget they are listening to a reproduced sound rather than a live performance. Achieving this state often requires a high-quality audio system that faithfully reproduces the nuances of the music, creating a sense of realism and presence.

When a listener achieves suspension of disbelief, they may perceive the music as more emotional, dynamic, and lifelike. This phenomenon is often associated with a feeling of being transported to the recording studio or concert hall, experiencing the music in a way that feels truly captivating and immersive.

Audiophiles and enthusiasts often seek to attain suspension of disbelief as a benchmark for evaluating the quality of their audio setups. They invest in high-end audio equipment, carefully select recordings, and optimize the listening environment to enhance the chances of achieving this heightened state of musical engagement. However, it's important to note that the experience of suspension of disbelief is highly subjective and may vary from person to person based on individual preferences, listening skills, and emotional connection to the music.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Non audiophiles ie regular people certainly have to suspend their belief when looking at us and our hobby.

 

[tima]

Ron, what's the difference between your opinion on this topic and that of an electronic robot?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, what's the difference between your opinion on this topic and that of an electronic robot?

I think ChatGPT did an excellent and accurate job of describing my understanding of, and my practical use of, the term.

What do you think?

 

[microstrip]

Ron,

You are killing any forum discussion / debate using ChatGPT to start a thread.

ChatGPT will extensively summarize all the common place and clichés about the subject, surely including some true information. Sorry to say, but I find such practice insulting to our participation - I do not consider ChatGPT as an effective member and I will not spend my time discussing with a machine .

I would happily accept however if someone quotes parts from a ChatGPT answer with proper identification and builds a personnel argument analyzing its answer. All IMO, YMMV.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Now you want to argue about why an accurate and useful definition of a term should not be used? Really?

 

[Al M.]

Ron,

You are killing any forum discussion / debate using ChatGPT to start a thread.

ChatGPT will extensively summarize all the common place and clichés about the subject, surely including some true information. Sorry to say, but I find such practice insulting to our participation - I do not consider ChatGPT as an effective member and I will not spend my time discussing with a machine .

I would happily accept however if someone quotes parts from a ChatGPT answer with proper identification and builds a personnel argument analyzing its answer. All IMO, YMMV.

Like Ron, I find the ChatGPT summary excellent. Can you come up with a better one?

Nobody needs to "discuss with a machine". The machine is trained to synthesize human input from which it learned, that's all. The result is a quite human summary, which can be discussed here in human terms.

 

[microstrip]

Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Now you want to argue about why an accurate and useful definition of a term should not be used? Really?

Perfect Ron, your forum, your rules. IMO you should enter ChatGPT as a full member, giving it the tittle of "Super Expert".

I participate to learn and debate about high-end audio, not to argue about AI and its use. So I am out of this thread.

 

[oeno]

Don’t audiophiles have to suspend their disbelief when they listen to digital?

Or is it when they listen to vinyl and can’t believe what they are hearing from a 19th century invention….?

Or do we suspend our disbelief about what we are hearing when we know (or don’t know) how much the system cost?

If ST Coleridge knew to what uses suspending disbelief would be put to in the 21st century, he would have taken more laudanum sooner…..

 

[Ron Resnick]

Perfect Ron, your forum, your rules. IMO you should enter ChatGPT as a full member, giving it the tittle of "Super Expert".

I participate to learn and debate about high-end audio, not to argue about AI and its use. So I am out of this thread.

Please tell us your definition of "suspension of disbelief."

 

[microstrip]

Like Ron, I find the ChatGPT summary excellent. Can you come up with a better one?

Nobody needs to "discuss with a machine". The machine is trained to synthesize human input from which it learned, that's all. The result is a quite human summary, which can be discussed here in human terms.

Yes, AL M. You are highlighting the problem - the definition is childish, repetitive and mediocre but written in a way that any people will easily understand and find it excellent. But it will not help our discussions.

 

[microstrip]

Please tell us your definition of "suspension of disbelief."

It would not be "my definition" , but mostly findings of others who researched in sound reproduction. But I have now lost my interest, sorry.

Anyway, why should I spend time and effort if you just use ChatGPT in ten seconds?

 

[Al M.]

Yes, AL M. You are highlighting the problem - the definition is childish, repetitive and mediocre but written in a way that any people will easily understand and find it excellent. But it will not help our discussions.

What exactly is "childish, repetitive and mediocre" about it?

 

[Ron Resnick]

It would not be "my definition" , but mostly findings of others who researched in sound reproduction. But I have now lost my interest, sorry.

Anyway, why should I spend time and effort if you just use ChatGPT in ten seconds?

I ask you for your definition, and you dodge and parry.

Thank you for proving my belief that you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[tima]

I ask you for your definition, and you dodge and parry.

Thank you for proving my point that you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

The choice to reject your methodology does not prove your point.

 

[howiebrou]

It would not be "my definition" , but mostly findings of others who researched in sound reproduction. But I have now lost my interest, sorry.

Anyway, why should I spend time and effort if you just use ChatGPT in ten seconds?

Come on, take up the challenge and spend 10 seconds and come up with your own definition! Let US judge which is better. Hopefully you don't lose to a chat bot! Good Luck.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Aren't we just talking loosely about believability.

Beyond that there isn’t some definable tipping point into an all masking generic state of delusion… other than the more real perspective of being an audiophile where the time and money that we spend actually makes sense to us.

 

[bonzo75]

Aren't we just talking loosely

Yes!

 

[Al M.]

ChatGPT says:
However, it's important to note that the experience of suspension of disbelief is highly subjective and may vary from person to person based on individual preferences, listening skills, and emotional connection to the music.

While its constant -- yet correct -- emphasis on subjectivity in diverse explanations of high-end audio may be annoying to some, the AI bot actually reveals more insight into human nature than many humans have. The reason obviously is that the creators of ChatGPT forced it to draw from a collective of numerous human sources in the process of synthesizing its answers.

Contrast that with the tiresome dogmatism and absolutism of a number of WBF members who constantly tend to elevate their own personal, subjective experiences and opinions into some universal truth, often with the attitude of (said or unsaid) "I have much more knowledge than you do".

 

[tima]

Aren't we just talking loosely about believability.

Beyond that there isn’t some definable tipping point into an all masking generic state of delusion… other than the more real perspective of being an audiophile where the time and money that we spend actually makes sense to us.

"Suspension of disbelief" is wordy-clever audiophile reviewer-speak that strikes me as gear-head oriented. Even the bot seems to recognize that though it doesn't realize what it is saying. "In the subjective hobby of high-end audio, "suspension of disbelief" refers to the phenomenon where an individual, typically an audiophile or music enthusiast, experiences a level of immersion and emotional engagement in the music that goes beyond the technical aspects of the audio system." Imagine that -- having an emotional engagement with music that goes beyond technology.

What I can accept and do believe is that there is a point where we slow cerebral cortex processing of what we hear and 'allow' music to light up our limbic system. I don't believe this is intentional. The non-cognitive experience of music can trigger areas in the brain sufficient to cause the release of endorphins; when they reach the limbic system’s opioid receptors, feelings of satisfaction ensue.

The phrase "suspension of disbelief" is hackneyed, awkward and overused. I don't go into a listening session thinking that I will neither hear live music nor be emotionally engaged and then hope that somehow I can disabuse myself of that thought. The music itself is far more interesting and enjoyable than the psychological infrastructure around hearing it.

More bot: "In the context of high-end audio, suspension of disbelief occurs when the listener becomes so engrossed in the musical experience that they forget they are listening to a reproduced sound rather than a live performance. "

As much as music can elicit emotion or feelings of satisfaction, I am sceptical of the notion that at some point we 'feel' reproduction is indistinquishable from reality.