Can you be an audiophile if you don't own "great/expensive" equipment..?

I agree. I used to listen to the Tijuana Brass in my younger days, along with everything else. I have picked up a few used albums for the collection. But, I am finding them to be harsh, when played through a revealing system. Same goes the the Chicago boxed set, from way back when.

One day, I was giving a friend a hand, who is a carpenter and handyman. As we were working at this guy's house, he was putting on the TJB albums, which were his originals, being played over a decades old system and they sounded sooth an mellow.

I plan on putting together a true vintage system using some Wharfedale W70's speakers from the mid sixties, with a 60's era EL84 based tube integrated tube amplifier and a Dual 1219 turn table, with a Sure V15 Type IV cartridge.

And, that should do the trick in presenting vintage music from that period.

Agree, I was a member of Head-Fi.org prior to joining the forum. Back then, I enjoyed listening with a player and decent IEM's (In Ear Monitor's).

Today, most smartphones, even the $100 level ones sound amazingly good, when played through a good pair of cans or IEM's.

Not only is there nothing wrong with being an audiophile and listening to all of your music through your favorite type of "cans", but unless you have a decently transparent higher end stereo, the headphones today are likely to offer more accurate sound reproduction than an average stereo.

Someday, my listening room will be transported into another dimension. And I would he happy again to listen to my music through headphones once again. Until then, I will continue to listen through speakers.

See above. (I won't report you to your fellow "audiophiles" over at Head-Fi).

Quite right Mr. Sammach!

Well said chervokas!

Me too! I don't like owing any money to anyone.

I think that system synergy is EVERYTHING!

I like to play with audio, that is no secret. I try all kinds of different equipment and all kinds of different things.

I will mix HT with stereo, I will run rear HT speakers in stereo as well as HT. I mix vintage equipment with equipment of modern manufacture.

I will mix tubes with sand amps.

I will mix a vintage turntable with a modern day cartridge.

I will combine home stereo gear with pro-sound reinforcement equipment.

I'm perfectly fine with both CD and Records.

I have both a modern turntable and a vintage turntable right beside each other.

I mix all types of music and sounds that I like to listen to.

Sometimes, I am content to Chromcast video's with audio recording of nature sounds, like rain, and ambient music with nature sounds and added synth bass.

Other times it's records or CD's

And, I'm content with listening to subscription Pandora, which I have on most of the day.

System synergy is putting all of this together. I can have three separate systems playing together and they all blend in together.

That is SYNERGY, and as you say, it is not about how thick your wallet is.

I like and agree with your statement. Both can equally enjoy the music, but audiophiles try (and succeed [sometimes] on taking things to the next level.

It is interesting, out there, everyone is a music fan. They are plugged in all day, every way they go, always with their earbuds in their ears.

But, I have as yet seen even this first one of these people, just sit and actually listen to music and do very little else.

Here, at the motel, we have so many "audio friends" who come over in the evenings and we just sit and listen to music for hours on end. Sometimes we enjoy a home cooked meal, from our non-commercial (but efficient and well equipped kitchen), enjoy a few adult beverages, pleasant and engaging conversations, sometimes extending well into the night until 4:00 o'clock in the morning.

Other times, we will dedicate some time to watching a movie on the HT, with 5.1 surround sound.

But, at the end of they day, we sit and listen, for hours on end. All these "music is my life" people would never consider just listening to music for the sake of doing so.

How many people today would listen to Tommy on vinyl from beginning to end, or to listen to Jesus Christ Superstar from beginning to end (which I still consider, to this day to be the most creative works of Andrew Loyd Webber and Tim (The Lion King) Rice.

In more modern times, almost no one ever mentions these creative times when Andrew and Tim collaborated together on a project, which included the highly successful Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (which later became a play, with Donny Osmond, playing the principal part).

At one time, I would have liked to build a separate, isolated space, in a room, where I could control every aspect of the projection based HT and the 2-channel stereo system. Complete with theater seating, a bar, popcorn machine, marque lighting, a box office elevated rear seating with large plush leather reclining chairs and tactile sound transducers under each seat or seat grouping. Plus a huge sub array.

But now that we have developed and evolved our multi-purpose listening space. I enjoy too the feeling of less isolated and enjoy people around, in my presence (certain people that is).

I have a smaller room that I could create a intimate atmosphere with a HT projection system in place, with maybe a 120" front projection screen. But I would not be able to have the SQ that I am able to obtain in the main listening space.

What we are doing here is pure audio, pure video and pure engaging FUN. I would not to have it, any other way.

I think that this is a most important point. I always hear "music" people dissing audio people because they (from their own "limited" perception) feel that audiophiles always care more about their gear than the music that they are or should be listening to.

To those folks, I say... I like to play with audio gear, it has been and may always will be a passion of my life.

"Guilty as charged"! I readily don't know that much about music, other than I know what I like to listen to and what I personally don't share other people's fondness for. As long as I have good music to listen to, I don't really care what it is, just as long as it sounds pleasing to my (aging) ears.

I also hear comments, all the time, about not having new young talent that was up to par of most musicians, back in the day.

This, I find as horse puckey. Maybe they don't play the same styles, but there is a never ending supply of brilliant new talent out there.

The main differences between now and years past, is the in the pop/rock era and into age of disco and on into the eighties, the main focus of the music industry was more towards bands, where now, due mostly to YouTube, we are seeing so many talented individuals emerge.

For the most part, I enjoy new artists more than I do wanting to get "stuck" in the 60's or 70's (although I firmly believe that every "certified audiophile" room will have at least one or even two "lava lamps". If you are not from there, don't ask why, just accept this little of audio folklore and russell up a an authentic lava lamp or two. And don't forget about nipper!

Beyond that, an audio room is a clean slate, but tasteful mood lighting is always a welcome addition.

Have been playing the remastered audiophile copy of Steppenwolf live, through a complete tube stage, all the way to the A7'.

Swteet...

 

Yes you can. It's about striving for the best sound, not spending the most money. Just because one doesn't have the means doesn't mean they don't value good sound. Have you ever wiped off a scratchy 45 with your sleeve before playing it on your crappy record player? Voilà! You're an audiophile.

 

24 pages - have we settled on a def yet?
No?
Imagine that!

 

The very very vast majority of people (on this planet anyway) “listen to and enjoy the music” and don’t know or even give a flyin’ fidoo about what its coming out of. What do we classify them as?

 

Normal human?

 

Lucky bastards lol

 

Audiophile?

Get the best equipment that you can, or the equipment you really enjoy listening to... & then just enjoy the music and kind of forget about the equipment.

I rarely mess with the actual stereo system - sounds fine, real, & lifelike... done. Personally, I have much more fun searching for & finding good titled 'used' M- LPs, of all types of music.

Yes... synergy.

 

I once had a very intelligent aerospace electrical engineer tell me that some people really cannot decipher and appreciate most music. To even be able to tell one way or the other what "good" music is. He didn't say this in a critical way. And may have been describing himself. Discerning and appreciating good sound may not be as universal as we may think.

 

The discerning part is relatively simple. Identify the bad sound then see what's left.

 

Unfortunate. They don't know what they are missing. Being an audiophile means you will hear things most people never will as they listen to their car radios, blue tooth speakers, or mp3 players. You can look at small photo of a masterpiece painting in a book or you can go to a museum and look at the real thing (or, at the very least, a high quality print).

 

Maybe not as simple as we take for granted...

 

eating popcorn.........

 

Or just buy better music, and don't worry about it...

 

hahahahaha


wow, 24 pages about this. proves people have nothing better to do than argue about a word and its meaning.

it is fun to read...... lets make 300 pages about this.....

 

Self knowledge is important. Kudos.

 

Maybe there should be a WORLD AUDIOPHILE SOCIETY LICENSE to issue to those that have equipment that meets the strict standards. There could also be recognized membership levels eg from the top down: 4 GOLDEN SPEAKERS to CLOTH EARED PEASANT (less than 1 GOLDEN SPEAKER may attract snide remarks) but don’t feel too bad its only your equipment that your music taste will be judged on.

Anyone want to apply for a seat on the Board Of Detractors?

 

Here's the thing: Most musicians are not audiophiles. Some are. But when it comes to honoring the artists' intentions, most of the artists aren't intending an audiophile experience. That's why they let their recordings be engineered poorly; that's why they let their live mix go out through poor PAs.

But once music of true sonic quality's going through a soundboard, there's more than one way to get it right. Given musicians who've found good sounds to begin with -- again, a small minority in the profession -- there are going to be lots of ways to color those sounds and still have something aesthetically wonderful. There's a minimum threshold of fidelity to meet, but once you're past that any further improvement is icing, not cake.

So let's stop arguing about whose equipment is good enough to be deserving, and start arguing about which musicians have put out work which even deserves fidelity. That'll be a more gracious discussion, right?

 

Wait... I need to hear more about this building. This sounds like a horror movie! The sock in the mouth to sleep!

Each additional dollar is worth less, in welfare terms, than the previous one. The welfare value of an additional dollar to someone with zero dollars is infinitely higher than the welfare value of an additional dollar to Bill Gates. (As a tax policy personal, I have to add that this is why flat tax adherents are sorely mistaken about its fairness. Equal sacrifice, in welfare terms, requires progressive rates.)

For someone with millions of dollars, they really don’t need to rationalize that extra $10k for a small improvement, since the value of the $10k to them is small compared to its value to a poorer person.

I hate to disagree with my fellow CVille-ian, but money does improve happiness. Study after study in the happiness literature shows this. Yes, there are diminishing returns, but more money is better. The average poor or working class person’s money-related stresses are infinitely higher than those of the average rich person’s. Lack of money is a significant cause of divorces, depression, etc.

I have zero tears to shed for the rich person stressed about having too much money. You know why? Because if the money truly made their life worse, they could easily solve the problem by giving it away. (To me, for starters!)

Are you *really* from Funk, or did you find a loophole in SHF’s “real location” system?

 

One thing I’d like to add is that being an audiophile *has to* involve caring about accurate sound reproduction. If you just love music, that’s great, but then you’re a music lover, not an audiophile.

I also think that it can’t all be *purely* subjective. We can debate the merits of various pieces of equipment in the same ballpark. I’ve had dozens of sets of bookshelf speakers ranging from $150 to $1,500 to...more than that. There are some speakers (or headphones or amps or DACs or etc) that punch way above their weight. And, as I noted above, the law of diminishing returns does apply in audio, as in most areas. However, it’s simply not the case that, say, the Pioneer BS22s, as great as they are for the price, sound as good as LS50s. I’d have to seriously question the judgment of someone who claimed such a thing.

That said, there *are some* bad expensive speakers (however one defines expensive), because (at any market level) there are just dud products. There are $500-$800 audiophile headphones that sound worse than a $150 paid of NAD HP50s...and measurements can show us clearly *why* that’s the case. (Check out the work of good folks at SuperBestAudioFriends or Inner Fidelity to learn more.) But *on average* a $500 pair of cans will sound better than a $150 pair of cans. The same engineers, when given more resources, can usually make better stuff.

*That* said... Everyone (except for the filthy rich) must work within a budget. To me, being an audiophile is 1) caring about achieving accurate audio reproduction, 2) educating yourself about how to listen and how to know what audio music reproduction sounds like, and 3) achieving as good of reproduction as you can within your budget, whether it’s in the hundreds or the many thousands.

The person who listens to the EarPods that came with their iPhone and the rich person who buys a show-off system simply because they saw an article in a swanky magazine can be equally “un-audiophile,” because they’re operating from ignorance (in the literal sense of the term).

Likewise, the person with a $500 budget who works really hard to maximize it (in terms of quality audio reproduction) and the person with the $5000 budget who works really hard to maximize it can be equally “audiophile.”

Essentially, being an audiophile can’t be completely “ignorance is bliss.” You have to know how to educatedly discern quality, at any given price level. However, it also cannot just be “whoever has the most expensive system is the best audiophile,” because that’s a measure of monetary means (or, perhaps, credit card debt!), not of educated pursuit of quality music reproduction.

If you’re well-informed, constantly seeking information about how to get the best audio performance within your budget, then you’re an audiophile.

Close the thread. I’ve solved it!

 

Hey- if neighbors can't politely disagree, who can?

I'm unaware of the studies you cited and curious. I'm sure that money increases happiness to a point, but I envision a bell curve- at some point more money begins to decrease happiness until you get to the filthy rich, who are pretty miserable.

I have no studies, only anecdotal evidence of small sample size, but the filthy rich woman I know (w/ a fabulous estate on Garth Rd.) is one of the most anxiety-ridden, distrustful people I've ever met. And I've actually had that convo w/ her about if it makes you so miserable, give it away and put it to good use: start some charitable foundations. But that didn't fly.

The happiness studies I've heard of found family to be the most important aspect and the USA scored lower than most "poor" countries. Do you have any study cites/links?

 

Synergy between components is more important than "great" or "expensive" gear. You can have the best gear in the world,
but if it's not well matched, you might as well just listen to a boom box.

 

Altering the signal is a distortion of the input, it's non-linear response. If a piece of gear is changing the frequency response of the input signal, it's not being faithful to the input signal, that's not an example of "fidelity," it's an example of the opposite of fidelity.

Now, there's a whole school in the audiophile world today that is not interested in "high fidelity" -- they're interested in adding second harmonic distortion to the input signal to make it more pleasing or, to make it appear to them more "lifelike" or whatever. So whether or not audiophile and high fidelity enthusiast mean the same thing anymore is debatable.

But there's no way that a piece of gear that by design alters the input signal is an example of "fidelity," high or low. And to suggest otherwise on the basis of the above definition is to bend the meaning of "distortion," which is "a change in the form of an electrical signal or sound wave during processing." Altering the frequency response is definitely a change in the form of an electrical signal during processing.

Now, I don't have any experience with Beats or Bose, so I'm not particularly opining on those. But one can't disregard alterations to a signal's frequency response in assessing distortion.

 

So this IS rocket science!

"Synergy between components is more important than "great" or "expensive" gear."

Truth brother!

 

Like audio, money has diminishing returns in terms of increasing happiness. But it’s not a “Bell Curve.” It increases pretty dramatically at first, then subsequent increases are small. There are only a few studies, on a few happiness measures, in a few specific parts of the world that show any decrease in happiness beyond a certain amount of money. But it never drops back down to unhappiness of the poor. And, as noted above, if that *really* were the case, people could simply give away the money and be happier. They don’t do that, of course, because there are many confounding things that may be associated with money in that particular context that make people less happy beyond a certain point, but it’s really not the money itself.

Here’s a sampling of studies:
Project MUSE - Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox
http://faculty.weatherhead.case.edu/clingingsmith/NEIW.pdf
Income and Happiness
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-017-0277-0.epdf

That doesn’t mean that you don’t know miserable rich people. It’s just that, on average, more money allows for more happiness.

 

Darn. Missed that! I didn't know there were audiophile speaker cables!