What is the test for a defendant to argue that evidence that was inadmissible as hearsay should have been admitted on appeal?

"We have long held that the proponent of evidence must identify the specific ground of admissibility at trial or forfeit that basis of admissibility on appeal." (People v. Ervine (2009) 47 Cal.4th 745, 783.) Under this rule, a defendant is precluded from arguing on appeal that evidence ruled inadmissible at trial should have been admitted where defendant's trial counsel did not specifically raise the ground for admitting the evidence. (People v. Fauber (1992) 2 Cal.4th 792, 854, cert. denied (1993) 507 U.S. 1007 [123 L.Ed.2d 272] [evidence the trial court ruled was inadmissible as hearsay was in fact not hearsay, but counsel's failure to raise the specific ground supporting admission at trial precluded raising it on appeal].)