This concept of reflection-in-action then invokes another of my favorite themes, which has to do with our own linguistic capacity for description. We usually talk about reflecting "on something," thus presuming that our activity of reflecting or the result of that activity (if it makes sense to talk about such a result) is grounded in an object (some thing). That presumption entails that object being static, meaning that we can "hold it still" while thinking about such matters as how it may be categorized (within the ontology of our life-world) and what attributes distinguish that object as a particular instance of its category. Where listening to music, or any other instance of reflection-in-action, is concerned, nothing can be "held still;" sound itself can only exist over a span of time. One may provide oneself with "static snapshots," whether in the form of music notation or, as Robert Cogan tried to do in some very innovative ways, through images of the very vibrations to which the ear responded, displayed as either time-domain or frequency-domain functions. Such snapshots, however, do not necessarily serve our capacity for "listening in the moment" and may even distract from it. I suspect this is one reason why the sight of a conductor working without a score at the podium is becoming more familiar. As a result, our descriptions must move beyond the noun-based limitations of objects into the verb-based realm of processes.
That last observation about conductors prompts an aside about Stravinsky's own conducting. I am not sure I ever saw him conduct (which would have been on television or in photographs) without his head buried in the score (which was always his own music for the few data points I had)! On the other hand this may be evidence that, for everything he had to say about listening, Stravinsky himself was not the most reflective of performers. It sometimes seemed as if his primary function as conductor was to "proofread" what he was hearing from the orchestra against what he was reading in the score; and I recall at least one account of Stravinsky visiting an orchestra to conduct "Le Sacre du Printemps," where Monteux was present and proved to be the better listener!
Of course the general nature of Schön's reflection-in-action involves far more than listening. In requires a broader capacity of self-monitoring, which entails the perceptual interpretation of what is both externally and internally sensed. Indeed, Gerald Edelman's model of consciousness involves not only our capacity for forming perceptual categories but also the interplay of those categories that arise from "sensation of the world" with categories based on "sensation of self." However, in the way that Edelman's model works, that sense of self not only guides any reflection on our actions but also is shaped by the actions we take, which is a fundamental principle behind what George Herbert Mead called "social behaviorism." Thus, any efforts we may make to unravel the mysteries of what it takes to be a good listener are likely to lead us back to how our listening is informed by our own sense of self and our capacities for interacting in the social world, yet another of my favorite themes!