Does what we've heard influence what we hear?

[MRT]

I have something that kind of been in the back of my mind.
How much does what we've heard in our past influence our perception of sounds we hear in the present? (or what we expect to hear)

i.e. I will never forget the first time I heard Ensoniq Mirage or the first Kurzweil workstation. They left me awe struck.
Today I have more soft synth options that would have ever thought possible that have capabilities way beyond those early examples. Yet I find that when I reach for a synth I find myself going back to the old favorites, as much as I like to play around with the newest things, they never seem to be right for what I'm hearing in my head.

So I put forth the question is this a rational decision or a case of altered perception?

[foosnark]

Just generally, humans are not very rational for the most part, and pretty much everything influences everything else.

[Passing Bye]

That's perfectly normal, just because something is new and "more capable", doesn't mean it's actually better and more usable than old one, maybe you are just trying to justify some GAS purchases, your plugin collection grows, but your music taste is actually the same as before, you think new tool will spark something new, you maybe even go experiment and don't actually discover anything new, you have formed your thing and you found what really works for you.

[jancivil]

it's altered perception, which you can count on in a human body to happen all the time

[vurt]

it's altered perception, which you can count on in a human body to happen all the time

especially with the right herbs and potions

[Hewitt Huntwork]

The thing I wonder is, can you trick the ear into thinking everything sounds amazing by emphasizing different details of each sound for a short period? We all respond to detail in sound. It makes things sound intimate, or clean, or whatever. But unless your arrangement is sparse, there might be too much aural traffic for you to provide that level of detail for an entire mix. I always wonder what would happen if I added or enhanced details for each instrument in a mix but only for sections or only in spots. Might a person walk away saying, "that ride cymbal bell had the best ping," even though it only pinged like that in one chorus and was less ping-y in the other choruses? Could the ear be fooled? It's fun to think about.

[Dirtgrain]

That is one theory of how the brain works. Where possible, we connect the new with what is already in our brain. In analyzing literature, constructivists say that when two different people read the same book, they actually read two different books because of the meaning they construct while reading it. One person reads the passage about the potato, and he is thinking of the time his friend put a potato in his tailpipe, or the fieldtrip he went on as a lad to a potato farm to learn about tubers. The other person read right past that passage, not having any notable thoughts or connections to it. Maybe with music, it's the same.

[MRT]

Dirtgram: your post pretty much sums up what I was trying to say. Do you know if that theory has a name?

Vurt: sometimes I wonder if herbs and potions are the reason I think about stuff like this?

[JerGoertz]

it's altered perception, which you can count on in a human body to happen all the time

especially with the right herbs and potions

[Dirtgrain]

Dirtgram: your post pretty much sums up what I was trying to say. Do you know if that theory has a name?

Vurt: sometimes I wonder if herbs and potions are the reason I think about stuff like this?

Information Processing Model:

The conversion of new information from working memory to long-term memory requires a process called Consolidation. As suggested by the Information Processing Model, consolidation is a complex process involving comparison of new information in limited storage to “previous knowledge” through Retrieval of related information from long-term memory. Thus, virtually no new information is consolidated without first comparing it to information we already have. Every bit of new information will be compared to “old” information already stored in long-term memory banks. Thus, if I tell you that in my living room I have an entertainment unit with a stereo, DVD, and television that sits just to the left of a brick fireplace, you see a version of the scene based entirely on images of entertainment units and fireplaces that you have already stored in your long-term memory. You can’t control this – all new information is encountered in terms of previous knowledge.

[MRT]

Dirtgrain: Thanks for the follow up and the link. It really is big picture stuff.

[kaynarov]

Many are still obsessively trying to imitate the guitar sound from the middle of the last century.
Music is not about the objective characteristics of sound, it is about emotions, and nostalgia is often a strong emotion. Choosing "that" sound, we are doing everything right, if it brings us to the right state. Even if the choice was "irrational".

[JerGoertz]

Dirtgrain: Thanks for the follow up and the link. It really is big picture stuff.

Yes, good stuff, important to understand when it comes to understanding how we understand.

[GRUMP]

There are several theoretical approaches that come to my mind ... e. g. learning theories.

I'd say try it. Follow the Links in my footer, try the elite one potato or check the chinese charts..

Rock n Roll changed everything and Rompler sound is still normality for me btw.

[Digitaldawn]

Absolutely