Understanding the Audiophiles community.

[Paul R]

1 hour ago, ipeverywhere said:

I'm glad I read the whole thing because my immediate response to OP was "Audiophiles listen to the equipment and the rest of the world listens to the music." Basically paraphrasing the Alan Parsons quote above. Read the below as _my opinion_ from where I sit on the sidelines. I'm certainly not an authority on the industry but I am part of the industry as I do have a tendency to buy stuff every great now and then...  anyway... here goes...  

 

But.. I want to expand on that quote for a just a minute. While most of us here seem to associate being an audiophile with expensive equipment I think that's wrong. I missed the golden-era of the hifi store and now the best hifi stores are hours away from me and run, predominantly, by people who want to make sure I'm going to buy something before asking me why I'm there. Now, I get that it's a business but the days of being able to listen to everything in the store are done. That part of being an audiophile is done. That isn't so much because the hifi store has changed but retail has changed and I get it. Also, there isn't anything "cheap" at a hifi store. Why would they compete with Best Buy and the like? And the cheap stuff is getting better every year so the stuff at the hifi store becomes more expensive to compete. More and more I see sound rooms filled with the exotic rather than the "good". Yes, visuals play a big part but like everything else the cost of entry becomes out of reach for more and more. Are those with complete Schiit stacks not audiophiles? I say they are and got a heck of a deal for their gear. I still prefer the look of a D'Agostino but I'm not spending any time in the hifi store which sells them as the cost is a bit out of reach and the sales guy has no time to let me occupy his sound room on something he knows I'm not going to buy this month. So, in the end, I also avoid that hifi store because it's not comfortable to be there. They just lost a customer. 

 

So now we direct order our gear off the Internet. That, in itself, has changed the hobby. Instead of making purchasing decisions because of what _we_ hear we make decisions based upon the descriptions of what others hear and the return policy / or ability to resell that gear. Going back to being an audiophile who craves listening to gear that also means we _must_ acquire new gear to hear something new. As an audiophile we're constantly looking for the next bit of kit to listen to and build an opinion around. If you want to listen to new gear and you have a limited budget then the average cost of your gear is going to be low. Or, you get into vintage and/or become a master of the used market. You're still an audiophile but, honestly, the stuff has gotten better over the years and there is better sound to be had with writing a bigger check. Again, the cost of my gear doesn't make me an audiophile. 

 

But what about that 99%? I think it's expanding. I know plenty of people who, before the release of the Apple HomePod had never talked about the quality of audio before. Now the sound quality of the thing was front of center to justify its price. It made people I know who had never heard anything but a bundled set of headphones that came with their phone start to ask me questions about "better". They finally had an interest in "better". And, in a way, the war between the better sounding all in one speaker, soundbar, Sonos system, etc. was on. Does owning a HomePod qualify as "unique"? I mean the thing has a bunch of DSP and room correction and sounds at least average, maybe slightly above average, compared to your Best Buy "theater in a box" for $300. So what really qualifies as unique these days?

 

I have a finer taste for wine than most people I know. I've also been offered "fine wine" and hated it. I don't know if someone needs "finer taste" if they truly are listening to the equipment rather than the music. Sure, I can fault someone for liking a particular style of music that is complete rubbish because of it's simplicity, lack of dynamics, and vocal childishness (not to mention total lack of any real instruments or vocals that didn't find their way through autotune) but then I'm not listening to the equipment anymore and therefore have taken off the audiophile hat for a bit. We can always say someone has a finer taste in music. I'm not sure I agree with having a finer taste in equipment (ok, maybe aesthetically; ugly is ugly sometimes). Money is often the barrier here and a lot of people simply don't consider what they cannot afford and I don't believe you need to spend big to be an audiophile. 

 

My system does not invite more visitors. I think this is because of a few points I've made previously...   Without hifi stores there is no local community of enthusiasts; we're all online and no one I know online has asked to come over. Of the people who have heard my system no one is looking to duplicate it simply because of space+cost; I have not been invited to listen to anyone else system in a very long time. In the "instant gratification" of todays society no one will take a decade+ of planning to get to where my system is today and no one I know wants to drop, today, the total $ amount I have in the system over that decade. I don't really have "audiophile" friends who want to dedicate space to a system either. And, finally, home theater kills the would be audiophile. It's difficult to put together a musically engaging system if your first priority is reproducing a Micheal Bay film at earth shattering SPLs. I have nothing against building out a home theater system but I find it really does get in the way of having a truly great audio set-up and even fewer people have an audio set-up without some place to watch a movie. I have more conversations about peoples theater set-up than 2 channel stereo. I think we're supposed to call these people videophiles. I still get to talk audio but not the stuff I'm really interested in as an audiophile myself. No videophile has ever asked me about soundstage and imaging. 

 

Anyway.... to @STC I think your view of an audiophile is really narrow and too exclusive to those trying to get into the hobby. In my view.... anyone who is listening to, and is forming an opinion on the equipment, is an audiophile. Don't really care what equipment they are forming an opinion about or what "music" is being sent through that equipment. At least they recognize the equipment makes a difference. That's the first start to helping them get to "better" and, as an audiophile, hunting better is part of the hobby. My question about your post: Are you trying to define what an audiophile is or are you purposely trying to narrow the definition because too many people with horrible sounding systems and calling themselves audiophiles are polluting the hobby (which, I could make an argument for as well)? 

 

Also, thanks for letting rant a bit about the topic. I needed something to do during my lunch. 

 

Well said, and a lot to think about. 

 

One new thing to point out, I just recently bought some gear from a pretty respectable internet retailer. Big ads on the site about "60 day return!" - when I checked into the small print (before buying from them) there were a few small gotchas to that. They will charge a significant (40% I believe, but maybe 20%) restocking fee if you just don't like the gear and want to return it. That's on top of clawing back the "free shipping" charges.  Effectively, don't buy from those folks if you think there is any chance you won't like what you buy and want to return it. This policy supposedly does not apply if the item is defective, and is waived if you are doing an upgrade. 

 

This is in pretty stark contact to Music Direct and Audio Advisor, who will, within reason, let you return pretty much anything if you don't like it.  That's the policy that built the internet trade in high end I think. Not liked at all by most retailers, but the only way to avoid be suckered with an expensive sink of hifi bling.  But with the changing world, it is difficult to deal with buying from small or niche dealers. As you say, most are not interested in helping you out or talking with you about anything unless they sense a near immediate sale. They are not your friend.

 

-Paul 

 

[STC]

6 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Yes, even then.  Ergonomics are part of the overall experience, as is visual "style" <insert site name change joke here> , reliability, or sentimental reasons.

 

For me, not so much.  But you can certainly get within the 'error region' (where you cannot determine the absolute best SQ of 2 items) while having top visual esthetics: look at Accuphase, or Sonus Faber.  Has anyone shown that something less 'pretty' actually has better SQ??

 

The factors I listed above also affect confirmation bias.  (As does cost)

 

And those factors are just fine for people to consider - after all the end goal is maximizing their pleasure and esthetics is part of the overall experience.

 

However, I personally prefer speakers where the SQ is high and only tiny bits of wood are used - Vandersteen, Magneplanar.

 

I have no preference. My only criteria for selection of an equipment is SQ and accuracy. Anyway, I mostly listen in a dimly lit room and only let the ears to do the evaluation.

[STC]

6 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Often, the amount of money spent only indicates a psychological problem.

 

Sometime upvoting own post too can indicate psychological problem.  

 

Just kidding.

[STC]

13 hours ago, sandyk said:

Unlike many here apparently, several friends and myself...….

 

4 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 We know each other well enough to say exactly what we believe are the shortcomings or positives.

 

 

And I said in post #1 "This works fine as long it remains within the group.   

[esldude]

1 hour ago, NOMBEDES said:

 

We come from the land of the ice and snow
From the midnight sun where the hot springs flow

The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new land
To fight the horde and sing, and cry
Valhalla, I am coming

 

 

I could not understand any of it.......
 

Best use of the Immigrant song in a movie.  About 3 minutes into the clip. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Yes, even then.  Ergonomics are part of the overall experience, as is visual "style" <insert site name change joke here> , reliability, or sentimental reasons.

 

For me, not so much.  But you can certainly get within the 'error region' (where you cannot determine the absolute best SQ of 2 items) while having top visual esthetics: look at Accuphase, or Sonus Faber.  Has anyone shown that something less 'pretty' actually has better SQ??

 

The factors I listed above also affect confirmation bias.  (As does cost)

 

And those factors are just fine for people to consider - after all the end goal is maximizing their pleasure and esthetics is part of the overall experience.

 

However, I personally prefer speakers where the SQ is high and only tiny bits of wood are used - Vandersteen, Magneplanar.

 

Well stated. 

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, mansr said:

 

Clap trap.

 

A guy who makes subjective judgments all day is now a hero for the objectivists. Ha 😁

[fas42]

58 minutes ago, STC said:

 

I have no preference. My only criteria for selection of an equipment is SQ and accuracy. Anyway, I mostly listen in a dimly lit room and only let the ears to do the evaluation.

 

The great joke in all this is that incredibly cheap, junky looking equipment, in a rig that looks a mess, can deliver all the magic of what is on the recording; to a level way beyond what the bling infested contraption is capable of. Audiophiles are often contaminated with a collector's mentality; rather than seeing it from a handyman's perspective ...

[STC]

3 hours ago, ipeverywhere said:

 

But.. I want to expand on that quote for a just a minute. While most of us here seem to associate being an audiophile with expensive equipment I think that's wrong.

 

It is not. Unfortunately, many buy first and decides later.

 

Quote

 

As an audiophile we're constantly looking for the next bit of kit to listen to and build an opinion around. 

 

Why? Honestly, I don't think anyone here can distinguish two well engineered equipment. Even speakers getting hard to distinguish at low levels.

 

Quote

 

But what about that 99%? I think it's expanding. I know plenty of people who, before the release of the Apple HomePod had never talked about the quality of audio before.

 

Audio quality is much more talked about now because of internet and the accessibility of good quality sound through ear pods. There are many serious audiophiles out there but hardly known in the forum. Anyone heard of Zero Frieitas?  There is another guy over here who got a large vinyl collection. Custom made boutique speakers. In our local forum no one knew of his existence. 

 

Quote

 

So what really qualifies as unique these days?

 

Any equipment capable of producing a decent sound that is not readily available in the market. Boutique speakers or vintage amplifiers that has been fully restored.

 

Quote

 

My system does not invite more visitors. I think this is because of a few points I've made previously...   Without hifi stores there is no local community of enthusiasts; we're all online and no one I know online has asked to come over. Of the people who have heard my system no one is looking to duplicate it simply because of space+cost; I have not been invited to listen to anyone else system in a very long time. In the "instant gratification" of todays society no one will take a decade+ of planning to get to where my system is today and no one I know wants to drop, today, the total $ amount I have in the system over that decade. I don't really have "audiophile" friends who want to dedicate space to a system either.

 

Last year, I had two friends who wanted to set up their hifi system but ended with something else because they couldn't or do not want to waste so much time on it other than listening. 

 

[on a side note -  the best visitors that you can have is young music students with a passion for sound. They will provide you far better assessment of the sound quality than a 30 years audiophile ] 

 

 

Quote

 My question about your post: Are you trying to define what an audiophile is or are you purposely trying to narrow the definition because too many people with horrible sounding systems and calling themselves audiophiles are polluting the hobby (which, I could make an argument for as well)? 

 

You read my mind.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The great joke in all this is that incredibly cheap, junky looking equipment, in a rig that looks a mess, can deliver all the magic of what is on the recording; to a level way beyond what the bling infested contraption is capable of. Audiophiles are often contaminated with a collector's mentality; rather than seeing it from a handyman's perspective ...

 

Yes, junky looking gear can deliver magic. 

 

No, bling doesn’t disqualify gear from being equally good or better than junky looking gear. 

 

What’s wrong with a collector’s mentality? Are your motives more pure or can anyone just enjoy this wonderful hobby any way they please?

[STC]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Why do people care about the reasons for others’ interest in this hobby?

 

Problem starts when audiophiles get confused with the purpose of this hobby. The most important aspect of this hobby is to bring the highest fidelity  sound reproduction that resemble the live musical performance. See post #16. Which means making the vinyl, cassette or CD or Hirez to sound like that. The better the source and equipment the closer you get to live performance. Having said that, no thanks to the repeated mantras by the audiophile experts" that you cannot recreate a live performance in the room despite saying the opposite  with each review that the sound is getting closer and closer to that. 

 

For music lovers. Only music matters and they don't care about the equipment. 

[STC]

30 minutes ago, fas42 said:

can deliver all the magic of what is on the recording

 

You are supposed to use what's in the recording to make the sound like live musical performance.  That what audiophile supposed to do. 

[fas42]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

What’s wrong with a collector’s mentality? Are your motives more pure or can anyone just enjoy this wonderful hobby any way they please?

 

Pure as the driven snow ...

 

Of course they can! A photographer may use the most finely tuned setup to take the best possible snaps of whatever; and also have a fine collection of cameras of all vintages, which still work - each pastime is equally valid, but he knows that the assortment of interesting gear on the shelf is not going to deliver the finest images ... what I see, in audio, is a confusion of the interest in the equipment with the belief that the "most interesting" will present the best version of the recordings' contents.

[fas42]

3 minutes ago, STC said:

 

You are supposed to use what's in the recording to make the sound like live musical performance.  That what audiophile supposed to do. 

 

Yes, the sense of 'liveness' is a fine goal - but I've learned that the contents of the recording can do that job fine, all by their lonesome ... provided, the gear gets out of the way, completely. And achieving the latter is still mighty hard to do, as evidenced by the normal expectations and attitudes of audiophiles.

[firedog]

I don’t know anyone nearby who’s an audiophile. Do I wish some of my audiophile friends could hear my system? Sure, but I enjoy my music and my system in spite of that. Not being able to show off my system doesn’t really matter. Enjoying listening does. 

[sandyk]

For a DIY person, the ability to hear some of the top systems owned by your friends is a big bonus, as it can often pinpoint areas of weakness in your own system that you may be able to further improve.

 This also applies to non DIY people too.

[STC]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

as it can often pinpoint areas of weakness in your own system that you may be able to further improve.

 

This is so true. When we work alone we tend to overlook the obvious flaws. Once @esldude commented that he sensed strong centred sound in my recordings. I tried to find out what he was hearing because that was not obvious to my ears and thought it could be the microphones until about a month ago. Once I recognize the sound now it is hard to ignore them. The question is why I didn't notice them earlier?  It is so important to have unbiased and independent third party assessment of your system if you genuinely wanted improvement.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

Problem starts when audiophiles get confused with the purpose of this hobby. The most important aspect of this hobby is to bring the highest fidelity  sound reproduction that resemble the live musical performance. See post #16. Which means making the vinyl, cassette or CD or Hirez to sound like that. The better the source and equipment the closer you get to live performance. Having said that, no thanks to the repeated mantras by the audiophile experts" that you cannot recreate a live performance in the room despite saying the opposite  with each review that the sound is getting closer and closer to that. 

 

For music lovers. Only music matters and they don't care about the equipment. 

 

The purpose of this hobby can't be defined by you or anyone other than the person enjoying it.

 

I shoot for the most high fidelity, but who cares if others don't.

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

Pure as the driven snow ...

 

Of course they can! A photographer may use the most finely tuned setup to take the best possible snaps of whatever; and also have a fine collection of cameras of all vintages, which still work - each pastime is equally valid, but he knows that the assortment of interesting gear on the shelf is not going to deliver the finest images ... what I see, in audio, is a confusion of the interest in the equipment with the belief that the "most interesting" will present the best version of the recordings' contents.

 

I think that view is a bit skewed, but that's OK. Best is always subjective unless one is shooting for measurements. When listening is involved, the best depends on one's brain. Like I said above, I go for the best sonic quality or accuracy to the source, but I also don't go crazy. If someone came to me with a breadboard component and said it will sound identical to the source but it might blow up my house, I think I'll pass. 

 

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

You guys got me going tonight. And I thank you for that spark 😀

 

 

 

[STC]

21 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The purpose of this hobby

 

What is this hobby about?  I am confused. 

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

Pure as the driven snow ...

 

Of course they can! A photographer may use the most finely tuned setup to take the best possible snaps of whatever; and also have a fine collection of cameras of all vintages, which still work - each pastime is equally valid, but he knows that the assortment of interesting gear on the shelf is not going to deliver the finest images ... what I see, in audio, is a confusion of the interest in the equipment with the belief that the "most interesting" will present the best version of the recordings' contents.

 

photographers as a group can really be into ergonomics - which makes sense as poor human factors design can cause you to miss a shot

[STC]

4 minutes ago, STC said:

 

What is this hobby about?  I am confused. 

 

Ok. You answered. 

 

28 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You guys got me going tonight. And I thank you for that spark 😀

 

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, STC said:

 

What is this hobby about?  I am confused. 

For me it's about obtaining reproduction in my house as close as possible to the source material, but within reason. For others, it's about great sounding audio that gives them as much enjoyment as our systems give us. 

 

I don't see the big deal why people want to define every last bit for everybody. The world is gray, not black and white. 

[Ralf11]

29 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You guys got me going tonight. And I thank you for that spark 😀

 

 

 

 

oh hey - you reminded me - I am looking for the next piece of gear

 

any ideas?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

 

oh hey - you reminded me - I am looking for the next piece of gear

 

any ideas?

Given those requirements, I'll have a recommendation for you soon. Why don't you sit back and lay off the keyboard until I have something for you 😁

[Ralf11]

I did.

 

But you did not make a recommendation soon.