Audiophilia Syndrome

[GUTB]

35 minutes ago, Nordkapp said:

Is this legit? 

Audiophilia Disorder was formerly considered merely a form of Obsessive–compulsive personality disorder with a strong focus on “perfectionism,” but work by Dr. Kraft-Ebiis-Ebfield on Cluster B pts. (Histrionic/Narcissistic spectrum) led to separation of Audiophilia into a separate Disorder, tho with strong Comorbidity

^^^^^^This part?

 

No. Hence the fictitious DSM publication (3.666).

 

@Ralf11 is struggling as a comedian. Most of his work are unfunny one-liners that often don’t make any sense. Here he is attempting to expand on the one-liner base, but it falls flat because by inventing a DSM classification he diminishes any comedic value it might otherwise have. Making up a DSM article could still be mined for humor using the similarity of the source material — for example by making a Audiphilia DSM quick reference card and posting an image of it.

[GUTB]

He noticed some people aren’t audiophiles and that makes him me?

[GUTB]

2 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Again, you're just picking an arbitrary distinction and presuming to know what others think. I may not fit your definition of audiophile, but I am, and have been for 30+ years. Because I understand something about the underlying technology and chose my components carefully and deliberately does not make me less of an audiophile than you or GUTB. 

 

Now, if you were to call me an audiophiliac then I may have to disagree. I've recovered from that disease a long time ago 

 

 

I note that your system is built from a basis of audiophile experiences -- the selection of a well-regarded A/B amp, a real DAC, and highly well-regarded speakers...

 

NOTE: My own experience with the Thiel 1.5s have been overall positive; their metal cones aren't as bad as I feared they may be, and I actually like their signature well enough. They provide even more stage than the $2.5k Fritz Carbon VII SEs (which are also 1st order crossover designs), perhaps thanks to the geometry of the tweeters.

 

Those are the signs of an audiophile, except for the focusing on the inexpensive side of things, which may or not be a sign of not being an audiophile. Not having a preamp seriously calls your audiophile credentials into question, but that may just be lack of experience born out of a focus on trying to achieve maximum value.

[GUTB]

5 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

A post like this seriously calls your neurotypical credentials into question.

 

I’m definitely neurotypical, 100%

[GUTB]

It's said that BMWs are "drivers' cars". In the neutortypical sense, "drivers" in this context refers to people who value the thrill of driving a high-performance vehicle.

 

If someone comes along with a Mazda, can he call himself a "driver"? The thrill aspect is subjective, right?

 

The answer is...no. Subjectivity is often used to hide objective facts. In the realm of human behavior and psychological response, out of the billions of people populating the Earth objective realities can arise as generalities. BMWs are high-performance cars, and Mazdas are not -- everyone knows this. "Everyone" is generality, but a meaningful one. We all simply intuit the fact; arguments using subjective stances are really just efforts to deny the thing everyone already knows.

 

Audiophiles in the neurotypical sense just means someone who values high-performance audio.

[GUTB]

7 hours ago, Summit said:

 

A serious question. Do you believe that the audio gear you self-own are considered high-performance audio to those that owns SOTA audio gear?

 

My gear is high-performance, but no it doesn't raise to the level of SOTA.

[GUTB]

Is there such a thing as an audiophile-grade car audio system? The accoustic environment of an automobile seems to suggest “no”.

[GUTB]

20 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

No, I didn’t ask what you thought about your own audio gear, and you know it. I’m asking if you believe that the mid-fi audio gear you have are considered high end to those that owns real state of the art audio gear?

 

You asked me about performance and SOTA. It's high-performance but not SOTA. I would classify most of the components as mid-fi. I don't understand your complaint.

[GUTB]

6 hours ago, Summit said:

 

You don’t understand? You have mid-fi gear, at best, and are constantly complaining and saying that what others have sucks and everything that’s you consider are below your SQ threshold, preference or type of design. I just turn the light on your system and gear and wonder if you actually think that those people that really have SOTA systems built around Wilson, Magico and Marten etc would agree with you that you have a High End system. I very much doubt it.

 

No need to repeatedly say that everything that you don’t like sucks, if it’s not actually sound bad, bad as in I can’t stand listening to it because I get a headache or something.  

 

I’ve said that class D and consumer-grade gear sucks. That’s the truth. I never once put my $15k system in the same category as a $50-100k system. Your issue doesn’t seem reality-based. Do you have a lo-if system and feel insulted?

[GUTB]

3 hours ago, rando said:

Too simple?

 

 

Not an audiophile.