An Explanation of the Term "Suspension of Disbelief"

[Mike Lavigne]

Why is "suspension of disbelief" not a term?

just because not everyone is comfortable with using it, does not mean that you or i or anyone needs to worry about it. it's up to the community (not any one person or group) to recognize it or not as a slang or a colloquialism.

i happen to subscribe to using it.

 

[PeterA]

If I am understanding your question correctly I believe you are taking the term "suspension of disbelief" too literally. It is an abstract concept, not a literal concept.

This state of mine can never be "reached." This is the basis of my explanation to you that one should not look at this in a binary way (has disbelief been successfully suspended, or not?).

You seem to be trying to understand this as a form of self-induced hypnosis, which it is not. The mind does not reach the point that you truly believe that you are in the concert hall and not at home.

Right. So when someone says “this new component transports me to the blue café and I am sitting in the third row in front of the girl with the guitar up on stage smiling at me”, that’s just hyperbole and reviewer speak.

As I say, I don’t use SOD when I communicate about audio. I usually talk about what I hear in terms of the sound reaching my ears at the listening seat. The fact that my goal is to have a similar experience as that which I have when listening to live music is purely subjective. It exists only in my mind.

The whole experience of participating in this thread makes me want to listen more to music and discuss this stuff less and less.

 

[microstrip]

(...) If your aural memory is well adjusted to live, unamplified music and you hear a system that just nails the tone, space (imaging and soundstage), dynamics etc. such that closing your eyes gives you a believable presentation then that can result in suspension of disbelief...it doesn't mean that you actually forget you are listening to reproduction but that it has the simulacrum of a live performance. (...)

Are you considering that those whose "aural memory is NOT well adjusted to live, unamplified music" do not get suspension of disbelief?

IMO the daily common real sounds are enough to teach our brain to create it.

 

[hopkins]

The definition of "suspension of disbelief" provided by ChatGPT as quoted by Ron in the first post, emphasizing the ability to immerse ourselves into the sound, reflects my own expectations and, to a certain extent, experience, in this "hobby". This magical state may be hard to achieve, but we'll know when we get there!

 

[marty]

What is disbelieved is the view that I am listening to live music when I lisen to my stereo. When suspending what I disbelieve I believe I am listening to live music. "I no longer believe I am not listening to a live performance."

Tim, I don't accept the premise that anyone believes they are listening to live music when they listen to a stereo. So the entire discussion rings hollow for me.

 

[brad225]

So, SOD is not as I thought was inferred at the beginning, that you felt like you were listening to live music, listening to your system?

Am I correct that, the fact listening to my system sound, can transport me, to what feels like somewhere other than my room, is the general accepted description of SOD?

Have any of you been listening to your system and forgot where you were and thought you were listening to live music? I have not.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

What is disbelieved is the view that I am listening to live music when I lisen to my stereo. When suspending what I disbelieve I believe I am listening to live music. "I no longer believe I am not listening to a live performance."

Exactly. Moreover, this does not say anything objective about the sound, only that it evokes this perception in the observer.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I don't accept the premise that anyone believes they are listening to live music when they listen to a stereo. So the entire discussion rings hollow for me.

I think this treats the concept too literally. It is an abstract concept, not a literal description.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Tim, I don't accept the premise that anyone believes they are listening to live music when they listen to a stereo.

Not if they are sane and one asks them explicitly. However, there fleeting moments when I and, I hope, others, experience the frisson of excitement when we question the objective knowledge of what we are hearing. It's an essential part of my addiction.

(FWIW, I note you say "stereo" and, snidely, I might suggest that a suspension of disbelief requires more channels. )

 

[bonzo75]

(FWIW, I note you say "stereo" and, snidely, I might suggest that a suspension of disbelief requires more channels. )

or less. Good monos are very realistic

 

[Argonaut]

The whole experience of participating in this thread makes me want to listen more to music and discuss this stuff less and less.

LoL ! Do attempt to be honest here at least … Were this particular thread initiated by a brand new 2023 member with a handful of posts, rather than one of the owners of the forum whom you and tim hold personally responsible for the departure from the forum of your most Worshiped Audio Guru , neither of you would be remotely as anally retentive in pursuing the OP as you have been … That Pound Of Flesh Aye

 

[Amir]

Why we should speak about "is the sound reproduction realistic?" while sometimes we do not enjoy live un-amplified music , I mean the important/main subject is not "the sound is realistic or not" , the main subject is why we do not enjoy music.
I think the important thing is our reaction to music not the sound.

Speaking about different sounds (Stereo vs mono vs more channels or different hardwares) is ok if you consider about your music listening experience.

Jim Smith uses the word ME factor (Musical Engagement) and I think this way is the right way to forget sound and check our reaction to music.

 

[hopkins]

Exactly. Moreover, this does not say anything objective about the sound, only that it evokes this perception in the observer.

What can you objectively say about sound when you are completely engrossed in the music? Isn't that "subjective" feeling the objective?

 

[bonzo75]

All of us should take a moment to ponder how resolution affects each of EE, ME, and SOD, and if either digital or vinyl could affect the triumvirate differently

 

[microstrip]

(...) The whole experience of participating in this thread makes me want to listen more to music and discuss this stuff less and less.

Peter,
This very unfriendly comment is ridiculous. BTW, I am sure that you do not need this kind of stimulation to listen to your great music!

 

[Kal Rubinson]

What can you objectively say about sound when you are completely engrossed in the music? Isn't that "subjective" feeling the objective?

Of course, that "subjective" feeling is the objective. OTOH, it is inherently subjective and tells other parties little useful about the actual sounds.

 

[Elliot G.]

Tim, I don't accept the premise that anyone believes they are listening to live music when they listen to a stereo. So the entire discussion rings hollow for me.

Marty,
To me this isnt a live versus recorded thing to me. THis group gets lost in the words and its like sometimes cant see the forrest from the trees. My system at times takes me away, it transports me to another place in time. There are many recordings that can never be produced live and thier are live recordings that can be amazing in a system. I don't think that large scale classical music would ever do this to anyone, it certainly never does it for me either. The systems just dont do ( maybe cant do ever) a full scale symphony orchestra.
There are loads of popular music that these albums/discs were made to listening to at home. I can name some easily but thats not the point. The point is that under a set of fleeting conditions with a well set up system in a proper room when all the stars align it creates an altered state, a magical encounter, a more than the sum of its parts events. When can you have this? I have no idea there is no way to say when it will or ever happen in your place. I enjoy the experience but don't expect it.
These silly words are nothing, Having a semantical debate to me ruins it all.
Many people here are listening for differences and looking for whats wrong in what they hear.

ASk this group of different people to describe a 1970 Lafitte
A meal at the French Laundry
SEX
GOD
Politics haha
I think this would be a very interesting excercise
An artist will find things very different from an enginner or scientist.

 

[microstrip]

(...)

(FWIW, I note you say "stereo" and, snidely, I might suggest that a suspension of disbelief requires more channels. )

Surely, if we are not addicted to stereo sound reproduction.

 

[tima]

Tim, I don't accept the premise that anyone believes they are listening to live music when they listen to a stereo. So the entire discussion rings hollow for me.

I don't either. It should ring hollow. What I wrote was about parsing the phrase 'suspension of disbelief in the audio context. It was not an endorsement. Some will try to change what they mean by the phrase to accommodate it.

 

[hopkins]

Of course, that "subjective" feeling is the objective. OTOH, it is inherently subjective and tells other parties little useful about the actual sounds.

Once you get into that "place", by definition there is nothing that distracts you in what you hear, so what is there left to say ? That the music sounds "natural"? That is sounds "live"? That it sounds "great"? That it is transparent, with accurate tones, has good imaging, etc... Everything should be there, and there is nothing left to say