Are You An Audiophile? Ha! Not according to this article...

[Bucknekked]

I'm sure my one Radio Shack HDMI cable is really deteriorating my entire sound system, if not the entire electrical system in the home.

Mr Magoo
Perhaps we need to stage an intervention. It takes a special person to stand up and own a Radio Shack product in public. I applaud your courage and fortitude.

On a side note, when Pogre was over the other day listening to my speakers, I did take out my Radio Shack analog SPL meter and proudly display it. After 30 years, it still works and looks like it actually does something scientific. You are not alone! There are others who will admit to Radio Shack ownership if they were given the chance.

 

[killdozzer]

Whoa, you started this thread on Wednesday and you've reached four pages already?!?! @Bucknekked you've got a nose for topics. You add to the spirit of the site.

I'm on my vacation on my home island, but I felt I had to join this thread.

Over time I've notice that people who chose to see themselves as audiophiles really have nothing in common with me. That site you've linked actually describes audiophiles pretty accurately, given that you're not trying to decide who gets to be an audiophile and who doesn't. Audiophiles like equipment. They literally like their audio units and they identify with them. They want their equipment to make a statement; this amp has gold built inside - that's how much I like/understand/know about music.

I, for one, still see it as sublimation or transfer. I've noticed that in all fields you find these people who try to compensate some sort of inadequacy with money; he is afraid to dive at 50 meters but has a limited edition Suunto watch. He doesn't have any genuine talents, but owns a really expensive sports car. He's not a good player, but if he has money, he'll own a Stradivari and always blame it on equipment.

I wanted to start a chat on this subject few months back. Maybe I will. It will be more of a worldview type of a thread.

In my language there's a nice term for people like all of you here and I see myself as a part of that group lacking only in money (no high fidelity on pennies unfortunate). It is "hifist". It's like: art - artist, so if you're in hi-fi you're a hifist.

I think most people here are into hi-fi and not equipment (not audio gear). An artist makes a song and records it together with a producer and a sound master and then you're looking for a way to hear this song at your home and to make it sound the way the artist intended.

To use another field of art to make this more clear - affecting the recording with audio gear would be the same as using a projector for movies that doesn't show i.e. colour blue because you don't really like it.

IMHO it completely misses the point of "art in the age or technological reproduction".

 

[Bucknekked]

I'm on my vacation on my home island, but I felt I had to join this thread.

I think most people here are into hi-fi and not equipment (not audio gear). A

killdozzer:
I wish I had my own island. Dang. Lifestyles of the rich n famous indeed.

The concept of "hi-fi" I can identify with both from a wordsmithing point of view and a concept.
From just a choice of language and the triggers certain words kick up, hi fi, fits my own self image much more accurately than audiophile. Audiophile, no matter how accurately defined, just sounds pretentious to me. Because of my interest in audio as a hobby, I may indeed be a text book audiophile. But it you ask me, I will probably never use that word. But, hi-fi will probably come up in conversation.

My parents called their collection of audio separates "a hi-fi" back in the day before we had a term for everything. They had a standalone turntable, reciever and speakers and of course they either listened to the radio or spun records. They didn't collect the gear because gear was collectible: they did it to listen to music. If you remember back far enough, the idea of having a local neighborhood record store and the ability to buy your own music and play it at the house was a pretty novel thing. It didn't always exist.

Like many other hobbies, ours has morphed. Some segments do indeed value their machines and boxes more than the music. The music is just a means to and end for them. I'm at the other end of the spectrum. For me, the music is the point of the whole hobby and buying equipment just helps me get there.

Thankfully, there's room in the hobby for everyone. There are even folks who enjoy the title "audiophile".
Not many have their own islands however.

 

[MR.MAGOO]

Mr Magoo
Perhaps we need to stage an intervention. It takes a special person to stand up and own a Radio Shack product in public. I applaud your courage and fortitude.

On a side note, when Pogre was over the other day listening to my speakers, I did take out my Radio Shack analog SPL meter and proudly display it. After 30 years, it still works and looks like it actually does something scientific. You are not alone! There are others who will admit to Radio Shack ownership if they were given the chance.

I've seen the local Radio Shack go from a large standalone building to a tiny hole in the wall, then poof! nothing.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

There is a lot here I don't agree with. You can evaluate headphones based on graphs, and this has been demonstrated in controlled testing, especially by Harman's research group led by Sean Olive and Todd Welti. This study is evidence of that. Here is a summary of that paper, and here is a more thorough explanation of the research if you don't feel like buying that paper. If you couldn't evaluate headphones based on frequency response, then there would be no preferred target curve at all, but there unquestionably is, and a heavy preference at that. The headphone driver to ear drum interface is, if anything, less complex because there is no room acoustics involved. The loudspeaker to ear drum is more complex because it is less direct, there is an additional layer of acoustics involved.

I also only half agree with the idea that exotic designs trickle down to lower models. It depends on what models and what speaker manufacturer. Some manufacturers use ridiculous ideas to design and sell their speakers, and anything trickled down from that doesn't help anything. Sometimes you do see good design trickled down to lower lines, for example the image control waveguide from JBL's M2 monitor making its horn geometry way down to lower LSR lines.

Headphone frequency response models have been around for 40+ years. The thing is, they never stay the same. It's still an evolving methodology and what's to say the 2017 incarations won't be surpassed by different models in the future? Certainly nothing in the past history suggests otherwise. Have they nailed it? I don't know if we can answer that without the passage of time to confirm it.

It doesn't matter how many speaker manufacturers incorporate design elements previously seen in more expensive speakers, it only matters that some do. Feel free to ignore the rest.

We are starting to see Beryllium as a cone material for non-tweeter drivers in sub $1000 speakers. Ten years ago those drivers alone were more than $1000 in wholesale quantity.

 

[killdozzer]

killdozzer:
I wish I had my own island. Dang. Lifestyles of the rich n famous indeed.

Unfortunately, it's just the island where I grew up, like home-town, so home-island.

I'm at the other end of the spectrum. For me, the music is the point of the whole hobby and buying equipment just helps me get there.

This was my point. Hi-fi, since it means high fidelity is something like "true to the word". I read a lot of what people here are saying and it most often comes to this. New members and old.

People here value performance first. They value Denon because of its performance, not because it makes them look special and rich. If Denon would suddenly drop steeply in performance people would abandon it or at least stop buying anything from the drop on.

Music is exciting. Equipment shouldn't be.

Mind you, I do consider intervention into art to be a legitimate form of expression. So distorting an original recording to ones liking is fine. However, mistaking it for true and natural is just false.

A lot of people here say they like to tweak and fine tune their sound systems, but this also means their point of reference is spot on.

I see Steve Hoffman forums to be true "audiophile" forums. It's too bad they call it "Music Forums". All they do is "brand dropping" as in "name dropping" (listing all the exotic brands that are suppose to make a person sound knowledgeable and hard to please).

I remember one member there saying that all the best speaker constructors agree there's nothing more boring than a "flat response" speaker. Making me wonder if they understand what flat response is. I'm beginning to think they see this term "flat" as flabby, dull, straight where it should be curvy, unexciting. Again, if you play exciting music it should sound exciting, and if you're playing unexciting music, the speakers shouldn't make it sound exciting.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Mr Magoo
Perhaps we need to stage an intervention. It takes a special person to stand up and own a Radio Shack product in public. I applaud your courage and fortitude.

On a side note, when Pogre was over the other day listening to my speakers, I did take out my Radio Shack analog SPL meter and proudly display it. After 30 years, it still works and looks like it actually does something scientific. You are not alone! There are others who will admit to Radio Shack ownership if they were given the chance.

RE: The Radio Shack SPL meter: I just bought one last month for $10. Call the cops. I've also got an IVIE handheld analog spectrum analyzer (pictured above), THE tool to have if you were in Sound Reinforcement or Facility Audio Installations 40 years ago; cost me $80, was probably $2500 in 1980. That grid you see on the device are LEDs that light up based on the frequency bands it reads.

 

[Mikado463]

killdozzer:
I wish I had my own island. Dang. Lifestyles of the rich n famous indeed.

The concept of "hi-fi" I can identify with both from a wordsmithing point of view and a concept.
From just a choice of language and the triggers certain words kick up, hi fi, fits my own self image much more accurately than audiophile. Audiophile, no matter how accurately defined, just sounds pretentious to me. Because of my interest in audio as a hobby, I may indeed be a text book audiophile. But it you ask me, I will probably never use that word. But, hi-fi will probably come up in conversation.

My parents called their collection of audio separates "a hi-fi" back in the day before we had a term for everything. They had a standalone turntable, reciever and speakers and of course they either listened to the radio or spun records. They didn't collect the gear because gear was collectible: they did it to listen to music. If you remember back far enough, the idea of having a local neighborhood record store and the ability to buy your own music and play it at the house was a pretty novel thing. It didn't always exist.

Like many other hobbies, ours has morphed. Some segments do indeed value their machines and boxes more than the music. The music is just a means to and end for them. I'm at the other end of the spectrum. For me, the music is the point of the whole hobby and buying equipment just helps me get there.

Thankfully, there's room in the hobby for everyone. There are even folks who enjoy the title "audiophile".
Not many have their own islands however.

I Agree with this Buck, while I'm probably a little older than you (there were no separates back in my youth, my parents had a Stromberg Carlson console) , there is room for everyone and with that being said some of the equipment geeks do actually cherish the music they produce !

 

[eljr]

Whoa, you started this thread on Wednesday and you've reached four pages already?!?!

Exactly. It was a nothing story, off the top of some guys head.

I took the time to read it, but discuss it? Come on.

Totally meaningless.

It did however spark some thoughts in some members here.

Like:

Audiophiles like equipment. They literally like their audio units and they identify with them. They want their equipment to make a statement; this amp has gold built inside - that's how much I like/understand/know about music.

That is the stereotype being perpetuated by...., not what I find in real life.

I think most people here are into hi-fi and not equipment (not audio gear).

I find very much the opposite.

IMHO it completely misses the point of "art in the age or technological reproduction".

I think a lot of points are being missed.

 

[eljr]

Audiophile, no matter how accurately defined, just sounds pretentious to me. Because of my interest in audio as a hobby, I may indeed be a text book audiophile.

Why is that?

Think about it.

BTW, the idea that "audiophiles" "value their machines and boxes more than the music" is nothing but tribal trash talk.

People need to get over the whole labeling thing.

 

[eljr]

I see Steve Hoffman forums to be true "audiophile" forums. It's too bad they call it "Music Forums". All they do is "brand dropping" as in "name dropping" (listing all the exotic brands that are suppose to make a person sound knowledgeable and hard to please).

And brand dropping is not the norm here too? Just different brands, oh my brother.

BTW, I really think (know) you are off base here. The Hoffman board is defiantly more about the actual music than is this one.

It's not even close.

Well, that ought to RIGHTFULLY ruffle some feathers.

I broke with the mores of the tribe in the last few posts.

Nothing upsets people more than a challenge of their beliefs. You know, like religion or politics.

Peace all!

 

[PENG]

The only way to debunk the audiophile is to get him to submit to double blind testing and reveal or expose his errors.

Not really, science and logic can do that too, if and when apply adequately.

 

[PENG]

What if you drive to someone's house you've never met in person, then have them over to your house just to listen to a sound system and call it "fun"?

Then you are an audiophile, enthusiast, audioholic, among others...

 

[eljr]

Not really, science and logic can do that too, if and when apply adequately.

not most times.

it's pretty hard to get a human to change a belief

it's takes time coupled with logic

it's just how we are

it's not just the dreaded audiophile that is this way, it's also the proud little objectavists

 

[PENG]

not most times.

it's pretty hard to get a human to change a belief

it's takes time coupled with logic

it's just how we are

it's not just the dreaded audiophile that is this way, it's also the proud little objectavists

Agree, it is hard to change a belief, but given the advance in science/technology, it is also not always hard to prove something that is just a belief, or an opinion, that is not fact. Well, I guess it depends on how we define "fact", as I suspect one may/could argue.. Science and technology (okay, probably started with belief) got us to the moon, those who contributed to that success has to believe in the relevant theories, calculations, and lab measurements etcetcetc..

 

[PENG]

Why is that?

Think about it.

BTW, the idea that "audiophiles" "value their machines and boxes more than the music" is nothing but tribal trash talk.

People need to get over the whole labeling thing.

I believe "audiophiles" should, and I think they do, value more about music and because of that, they have to value their machines and boxes a lot. I also believe they probably enjoy classical music and other music recordings that involve less electronics, and minimum electronic musical instruments.

 

[sterling shoote]

I am a recovering audiophile. I looked for and found fault in all the equipment I bought to enjoy recorded music. I was miserable. There was no satisfaction in the experience with recorded music as I had expected. I bought in to the advertising propaganda from a few of the name brands I was enamored with and these brands did not deliver. But, then other things of real importance became paramount in my life, so I no longer needed the audiophile distraction to life or mortality. Raising two kids, working to get ahead, and trying to please my wife occupied all of my time. So, for most of the 80's and 90's I settled for some equipment from Sony, which at least seemed to work properly. That's to say, the equipment was not dead on arrival.

Thing is, I still have that equipment to this day and now I am actually enjoying the recorded music experience. Seems as I am now looking at my equipment rationally, I see that I am getting a really great experience, one that does not cause me to seek for more. At any rate, maybe I've just grown up.

I am sorry for audiophiles, I believe they are mentally defective, exhibiting very compulsive and obsessive behaviors which keep them from any real joy that comes from relationships with people not things. Folks who have difficulty relating to people are very, very sad people who need help and prayers.

 

[Bucknekked]

I am a recovering audiophile.

I am sorry for audiophiles, I believe they are mentally defective, exhibiting very compulsive and obsessive behaviors which keep them from any real joy that comes from relationships with people not things. Folks who have difficulty relating to people are very, very sad people who need help and prayers.

sterling:
I think that last paragraph may get you some grief ! I am still laughing at it and its affecting my ability to type. I have been called mentally defective many times. Not over audio, but that really made me laugh.
I will wager however that a mild shitstorm may be headed your way. You may wish to close your windows and make sure there are no clothes outside drying on the line.

I can agree with what you wrote in your first two paragraphs wholeheartedly. I'm staying away from that last one however. I just put on a clean shirt.

 

[lovinthehd]

Audiophools might be a better word in that last paragraph @sterling shoote We're all audiophiles pretty much just being in this forum....

 

[Bucknekked]

I believe "audiophiles" should, and I think they do, value more about music and because of that, they have to value their machines and boxes a lot. I also believe they probably enjoy classical music and other music recordings that involve less electronics, and minimum electronic musical instruments.

Peng
Let me challenge that assumption as it applies to members of the AH. You used the word "should" so you are completely correct. Audiophiles "should" value music more than hardware. Let me show you what a brief search on the AH reveals.

CHALLENGE: I reviewed the last 200 posts of a certain SME on hardware. Not one post about music. Not one. I could expand that search of other frequent AH experts on various topics and while not a perfect 200 for 200, many are pretty close.

CHALLENGE: On the AH there are 23 categories for hardware threads of all stripes and flavors. There are 2 categories for threads on music. And to be quite honest, the 2 threads for music are not usually used for a discussion of music, just posts about what's being listened to or watched. And on those two threads for music, like I said, in any given month there are probably less than a dozen people posting there and far , far fewer than ever write about their music for a discussion.

CONCLUSION: While I agree, audiophiles (or whatever you label yourself in audio) should be more interested in music than hardware, the bulk of the activity on this forum isn't about music. I have only been coming here something less than 1 year. I love the forum. If there is a shortcoming of this AH forum its the dearth of actual interest and discussion of music as expressed on the forum itself.