Jump to content
IGNORED

What is an audiophile?


esldude

Recommended Posts

What is an audiophile?

 

A definition I find acceptable:

 

An audiophile is a person enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction. Audiophile values may be applied at all stages of music reproduction: the initial audio recording, the production process, and the playback, which is usually in a home setting.

 

To the audiophile, this $10,000 Ethernet cable apparently makes sense | Ars Technica

 

This is an article about the Audioquest ethernet cable for $10k. There already is a thread about that cable. Read what the general world thinks of audiophiles these days in the above article and especially the comment section.

 

The highest rated comment is telling:

 

A normal person uses the audio system to listen music, while an audiophile uses music to listen to his audio system.

 

It wasn't always this way. Sure people who had extensive audio systems for music were seen as a bit odd due to the time and money spent. They were not however considered crazy fringe characters who acted as sheep ripe for the sheering. Being divorced from reality with magical thinking is what has caused this situation.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

OK, gentlemen, please evaluate this statement for me, also posted on this thread: http://http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/%2410-000-ethernet-cable-promises-bonkers-mp3-audio-experience-23382/index2.html, but did not receive any direct response:

 

Branching out from my switch are all my network enabled devices including the aforementioned network attached storage unit. I recently installed AudioQuest Vodka CAT7 Ethernet cable throughout my entire network. Depending on the day of the week, I usually have 7-10 network audio devices wired to the network all using the new AQ cable. To help install the cable I had AudioQuest's David Solomon fly out to my house. One may think installing Ethernet cable is as easy as plugging in the RJ45 connector, but at my house the audio devices can be 15 meters from the main network switch. This 15 meter run of cable requires two people for installation, one on each end, because there is no clear path through the ceiling. We spent a good two hours running cable to a single Sonore Rendu Signature Series DLNA renderer. OK, maybe I could have spent another two hours and run the cable by myself, but it was nice to have someone else on hand to swap cables and listen for differences when switching from a hodgepodge of Ethernet cables to a full AudioQuest Vodka CAT7 Ethernet cabled system. When switching a single cable at a time I had a hard time identifying any sonic differences between the AQ cable and the brand X cable. I went through stages where I thought I heard a difference, but I couldn't consistently identify this difference when David swapped cables from behind the wall (out of my sight). However, I did notice an interesting difference after the complete swap to AQ Vodka cable was finished. My audio system had a lower noise floor. I don't know what to contribute this lowering of the noise floor to (better shielding?), but by changing to AQ cables my system is now quieter and enables me to hear into the music even further than I've previously experienced. This lower noise floor may also explain other AQ Ethernet users' experiences. Many people have suggested better highs, lows, or midrange after switching to AQ Ethernet cables. The suggestion that sonic differences in the music notes can be heard between Ethernet cables tends to rub a few people the wrong way. Based on my experience I'm leaning toward the cables lowering the noise floor which in-turn may give the sonic appearance of the cable having an affect on the actual music (highs, lows, or midrange).

 

See Computer Audiophile - Network Audio Refresher

1070957250_Imprimatur.NihilObstatSepia3Crop(2).jpg.2162a44365e84a5df7d456bf8026ed67.jpg

 

Link to comment

I think, except for a very very small fringe element of course, Audiophiles are without exception Music Lovers.

 

The fringe element, like the people buying $10K cables, always get all the press.

 

But the majority of audiophiles are not out in front of the press, are not terribly exception, spend anywhere from $1500 - $10,000 on systems they enjoy, and far more than that on music. ;) Not at all unlike those with other hobbies, like photography, painting, woodworking, etc. All of whom often spent similar or even greater amounts on their hobbies.

 

That of course, is not newsworthy to the millennial journalists always looking to poke fun at some group or another. So again, the fringe gets the news.

 

-Paul

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
OK, gentlemen, please evaluate this statement for me,

 

In technical terms, it is an uncontrolled experiment. Any number of things like a bad connection could produce an audible difference. And, as you are well aware, there is also the issue of expectation bias. It doesn't matter if it is Chris, me, Richard Feynman or the President of the United States. None of us is immune to such a thing, however honest or noble our intentions.

Link to comment
Most audiophiles are chronic box-swappers.

Their current systems might not be absurdly expensive but if you add all the money spent in a lifetime...

 

 

Thank you - I feel a little more normal now :)

Analog: Koetsu Rosewood > VPI Aries 3 w/SDS > EAR 834P > EAR 834L: Audiodesk cleaner

Digital Fun: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (JRMC) SOtM USB > Lynx Hilo > EAR 834L

Digital Serious: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (HQPlayer) Ethernet > SMS-100 NAA > Lampi DSD L4 G5 > EAR 834L

Digital Disc: Oppo BDP 95 > EAR 834L

Output: EAR 834L > Xilica XP4080 DSP > Odessey Stratos Mono Extreme > Legacy Aeris

Phones: EAR 834L > Little Dot Mk ii > Senheiser HD 800

Link to comment
In technical terms, it is an uncontrolled experiment. Any number of things like a bad connection could produce an audible difference. And, as you are well aware, there is also the issue of expectation bias. It doesn't matter if it is Chris, me, Richard Feynman or the President of the United States. None of us is immune to such a thing, however honest or noble our intentions.

 

To be sure, and I understand this. But I'm wondering if it is being suggested that only a fool who doesn't understand the technology would even consider trying this. I'd just suggest that this is not necessarily the case. Certainly I understand and appreciate how outrageous it looks and I have not studied the OSI model. That's why I like to rely on someone like Chris to screen out outrageous products, especially in this case because of his technical background. I would hope, some would say naively, that there are reviewers out there that have good sense, good ethics, so that I can gradually develop enough trust that a product may at least be worth auditioning. But I have a growing sense that a number of members here think that this is not the case and I should not even bother with most reviews because they are so unreliable. This basically would take me, a non-scientist, out of the hobby, or trusting only the opinions of the scientifically oriented when exploring an audio product I'm interested in.

1070957250_Imprimatur.NihilObstatSepia3Crop(2).jpg.2162a44365e84a5df7d456bf8026ed67.jpg

 

Link to comment

Speaking of outrageous products, the attached link may be of interest to some.

The comment about boutique fuses by M.C. may ruffle a few feathers though.

Alex

 

Power cords trial - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment

An audiophile is typically an anal retentive male , 40's or higher , with a small penis but big big tits(amps) , who usually will buy the latest audio gear even if it's not better then what he currently has but the audio review says it is .

 

The second definition in Webster's says its a form of mental illness . Go figure .

Link to comment
A normal person uses the audio system to listen music, while an audiophile uses music to listen to his audio system.
The above describes an audiophile suffering from audiophilia nervosa. Sadly, many do suffer from this disease.

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron

 

Link to comment
What is an audiophile?

 

 

 

A normal person uses the audio system to listen music, while an audiophile uses music to listen to his audio system.

 

It wasn't always this way. Sure people who had extensive audio systems for music were seen as a bit odd due to the time and money spent. They were not however considered crazy fringe characters who acted as sheep ripe for the sheering. Being divorced from reality with magical thinking is what has caused this situation.

 

[sigh] Another audiophile bashing thread. audiophiles for me are those that both listen and hear the music, not the audio signal or the playback chain.Interests in both those latter areas are in service of the music. Some people can't hear difference so seem to be obsessed with proving others cant either or that the differences aren't real. I think Superdad's burger analogy best described it,paraphrasing, if you cant taste the difference between foods stick to burgers.This is not justifying any price point for fine food, indeed it doesnt even have to discuss price (such as cost of an ethenet cable). I think the sheep and magical thinking references more aptly apply to those subscribing to pseudoscience in a never ending effort to discredit audiophiles. So, what will tomorrows thread be ?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
An audiophile is typically an anal retentive male , 40's or higher , with a small penis but big big tits(amps) , who usually will buy the latest audio gear even if it's not better then what he currently has but the audio review says it is .

 

The second definition in Webster's says its a form of mental illness . Go figure .

 

That's super helpful. And you are here......why?

David

Link to comment
That's super helpful. And you are here......why?

Apparently, this is his confessional.

Roon ROCK (Roon 1.7; NUC7i3) > Ayre QB-9 Twenty > Ayre AX-5 Twenty > Thiel CS2.4SE (crossovers rebuilt with Clarity CSA and Multicap RTX caps, Mills MRA-12 resistors; ERSE and Jantzen coils; Cardas binding posts and hookup wire); Cardas and OEM power cables, interconnects, and speaker cables

Link to comment
[sigh] Another audiophile bashing thread. audiophiles for me are those that both listen and hear the music, not the audio signal or the playback chain.Interests in both those latter areas are in service of the music. Some people can't hear difference so seem to be obsessed with proving others cant either or that the differences aren't real. I think Superdad's burger analogy best described it,paraphrasing, if you cant taste the difference between foods stick to burgers.This is not justifying any price point for fine food, indeed it doesnt even have to discuss price (such as cost of an ethenet cable). I think the sheep and magical thinking references more aptly apply to those subscribing to pseudoscience in a never ending effort to discredit audiophiles. So, what will tomorrows thread be ?

 

The "starting at" $10,000 Burger | DamnFineEating

 

 

Served with gold leaf where you might expect lettuce.

 

Possible threads for tomorrow.

 

$10,000 hamburgers! If you eat at MickieD's you wouldn't understand.

 

Le Burger Extravagant Comes With A $295 Price Tag | DamnFineEating

 

Requires a 48 hour notice.

 

Another possible thread:

 

$10,000 burger vs budget $295 burgers.

 

 

At least these benefit a charity. I suspect the $10k ethernet cable only benefits Audioquest.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

If only setting up a high performance system were as simple as choosing equipment based on specifications alone...

But because it isn't, we have to listen. We listen and we compare what we listen to with our database which consists of previous experiences with both reproduced and live sound. Unfortunately listening and comparing isn't easy: on the one hand, our perception can be greatly influenced by looks, price and opinions we've read in the media, and it's effectiveness depends on the "quality" of our database as much as our hability to discern what's sonically and musically relevant. Knowing how things work from a technical point of view helps, too.

Armed with these tools we are better prepared to identify problems and correct them, something commonly referred to as upgrading.

 

System building, or better still, system optimising is an expensive endeavour but it'll be more so if we are ill prepared for the job. Insecure consumers are easy pray...

 

R

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

Link to comment
To be sure, and I understand this. But I'm wondering if it is being suggested that only a fool who doesn't understand the technology would even consider trying this. I'd just suggest that this is not necessarily the case. Certainly I understand and appreciate how outrageous it looks and I have not studied the OSI model. That's why I like to rely on someone like Chris to screen out outrageous products, especially in this case because of his technical background. I would hope, some would say naively, that there are reviewers out there that have good sense, good ethics, so that I can gradually develop enough trust that a product may at least be worth auditioning. But I have a growing sense that a number of members here think that this is not the case and I should not even bother with most reviews because they are so unreliable. This basically would take me, a non-scientist, out of the hobby, or trusting only the opinions of the scientifically oriented when exploring an audio product I'm interested in.

 

No, it just says that if something is physically unreasonable (the ethernet cable is admittedly the most extreme example I have seen), the standards of evidence ought to be a lot higher, and your skepticism is more justified.

 

If someone says two different speakers sound very different, and one is better than another, it is unlikely to generate the same sort of response, only because there are a vast number of physically reasonable explanations.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...