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

Even with a semi-decent pair of headphones you can discern good mastering jobs and bad ones, and mixes for that matter.

Even though the nuances of a well treated room and well made, high priced gear cannot be necessarily matched, I feel like even simply a good pair of cans that aren't too expensive can send one going into the land of finding superior masterings and lossless/high bitrate.

So to me, yes

 

I wish I could enjoy that great picture but my computer monitor only cost $100 at Target so I guess I can't.

 

I'd say it's a state of mind. It's about the pursuit of better sound, rather than owning gear worth a particular amount.

 

Why not? You can be whatever you believe yourself to be.
You can be an "audiophile" while listening on equipment that cost 500 bucks.
You can be a "non-audiophile" listening on equipment that cost 25k.

 

Given the choice between new equipment and "new" music; more music always wins, except when at the thrift store, when it can be both!

 

Oh, I'm sure they'll have a cartridge that costs more.

It's a matter of the utterest indifference to me; I'll be busy enjoying my tunes.

 

No,you don't have to spend a ton of money all you have to do is maintain your equipment-replace the stylus when needed-check those speakers and the receiver and you should be ok.

 

To actually answer, yes.
You seek the best sound to your own ears.

 

Okay, but what if what someone thinks the sound they want are Beats headphones? Are they audiophiles?

 

No one said that you can only get satisfying sound from mega-priced equipment. My system is moderate or value-oriented compared to some.

I think the difference between an audiophile (not merely a device collector, but a real music appreciator) and not is the former has the innate curiosity to seek out and know what is good sound, not merely say that what they have is all they need. An audiophile goes and listens to much higher end systems from time to time to get a reality check on what they have. Having a high-end reference, you can seek out modest equipment that gets as close as possible.

But I just thought of an interesting situation. I know I have posted about this friend a while back, but I'll post this for debate:

This guy used to be a reviewer for a very high end audio magazine. All of his equipment had to be very precise to show off nuances in any piece that was swapped out in place of one for review. After the magazine folded, he took out the speakers he used for reviewing and swapped in an old pair of JBLs. He knew they weren't accurate, but boy, did they sound fantastic on rock and roll, the reviewer's personal favorite music. He is a music lover, and when he was reviewing, he could certainly be accused of having audiophile grade equipment. But once he swapped in the knowingly inaccurate, but fun and swaggering JBLs, was he still an audiophile?

 

You make 2 great points here!

1) Who cares about what others think if you're enjoying the music you listen to. True.

2) Your ears are discerning enough to appreciate what you get as you better equipment and you had the curiosity to seek it out (and the money, of course).

But with regard to 1), if anyone is going to contribute to a forum like this and opine on the quality of one pressing vs. another, having good equipment that isn't overly colored is important in order to contribute something really useful to the conversation.

 

Being an audiophile has nothing to with "owning" anything... despite what the magazines tell you.

 

A nice joke but not reality.

 

I never quite knew (nor much thought about) whether the term "audiophile" applies to me or not. Maybe "quasi-audiophile" or "budget-audiophile."

As a for instance, when I was a fairly young jazz musician/audio engineer I spent quite a bit of time researching and listening to components, trying to put together the best system I could with my modest finances. I'd heard very high end systems far out of my range, which helped me understand how good audio reproduction could be, but the prices were humbling. I'd also dealt with some snobbery. Still, I traveled to shops, listened, evaluated, and picked what I liked and could afford. Nearly everything I bought was used or a marked down discontinued/demo unit.

I felt I put together a decent system for around the same cost of some typical chain-store systems, but it sounded far better. I'd also developed a list of things to buy later, when I could afford going upscale (although when that time came all the shops and many of the brands were gone).

So, while I still don't know if the term applies (my guess is that it should), I believe putting together a system that can get the most out of your music and fits a modest budget is respectable and quite cool.

 

And this is true as long as the more expensive system was put together by someone who has good ears. I have heard some very expensive systems that were detailed, but inert. I have heard some modest sound systems that were quite engaging. A good set of ears, though, can put together a MUCH better sounding system with $50,000 vs. $5,000. I have read posts occasionally that assert that there is little difference in sound quality between budget equipment and esoteric, high end equipment. Possibly trolls, but it's certainly a ridiculous statement.

I was at a weekend in Toronto many years ago when a bunch of us from an online hifi forum convened from all over the US. There were a half-dozen members living in Toronto and we went and visited their homes to listen to their systems, as well as visit the several record stores in the city. One member had a small tubed amp and mini-monitors. Sweet little system. A bit limited when it came to the big, symphonic stuff, but the system was balanced, and musical. Another member had a system with speakers that at the time only cost about $3,ooo, but you could throw just about any type of music at them and they sounded really good, very musical. Then we went over to the house of one blog member who happened to be a record and equipment reviewer for a renown magazine. He had a large, dedicated audio room. He had a VPI HR-X table (with an arm he could remotely adjust the VTA to nail the angle with each record). His cartridges ranged from high end Koetsus to a high end Lyra mono. He had massive separate tubed preamps and amps. His speakers were massive Alons that cost about $20,000 by themselves.

The system, including the room, was tuned and mated with each other so well, that what I heard was astonishing. EVERYTHING sounded lifelike, including the size of the images. When he played symphonic music, we could "see" the hall and we were inside it in the audience listening. When he played a cello-piano duet, we were in a smaller room and the piano and cello were large and very real. If you closed your eyes, you could believe that they were in the room, or that you were in the room in which they were playing. Again, you could even clearly detect, virtually visually, the boundaries of the room.

When he swapped in his Lyra Helikon mono cartridge, he played a Duke Ellington Orchestra mono record. The orchestra was not only large and lifelike, but it was layered front to back. That was astonishing to hear mono recordings with that sort of fidelity.

Thinking about the guy's system which had the $3,000 speakers, I recalled thinking that his system played music almost as satisfyingly as the one with the $20,000 speakers, but it couldn't nearly reproduce the sort of lifelike images, changes in image size, nor astonishingly depict the boundaries of the recording venues the way the latter did. The latter system also had a sort of unlimited majestic power capability that the more modest systems didn't have.

My system is quite capable of discerning differences in equipment, cables, and power cords. I have swapped many things in and out of my system over the last 20 years or so since I got back into hifi. I know my system is limited in certain ways. Its deep bass is lacking. The top end isn't as sparkly, detailed, or as refined as I would like. The strength of my speakers is an absolutely gorgeous and detailed midrange. My system is not capable of huge dynamic swings. It can play, however, just about everything you throw at it and be musically involving. For the most part, instruments sound real. They have a true tonality. Reed and string instruments sound reedy and woody. You can hear the resonance of an instrument's body, with the myriad of complex overtones. Rock music sounds crisp and rhythmic. Jazz has decent pace and swings. Vocalists sound real if recorded well. And it's easy to hear if a vocal has gone through some sort of processor.

I do love hearing better systems than mine. It helps keeps things in perspective, and gives me some food for thought for the time I am upgrading.

All of the above systems I described above when I went to Toronto were owned by audiophiles. Even though there were a variety of price points, all of the owners had a passion for music, great ears, and a recognition of the strengths and limitations of their system, although the really expensive system was probably the most ideally realized system I have ever personally heard. But then I think of Michael Fremer's system, which probably costs 2-3 times that of the really expensive system I heard in Toronto.

 

Here are two of Steve Guttenberg's myths about audiophiles:

-All audiophiles are rich
Far from it -- that's why there's so much great affordable audiophile grade equipment on the market from the likes of Audeze, Audioengine, ELAC, FiiO, Grado, Hifiman, NAD, Pioneer, Schiit, U-Turn and many, many others. A lot of audiophiles buy used high-end gear for a fraction of the price of what it cost when new. My audiophile journey started when I was 16, and I bought gear with money earned from my afterschool job at a supermarket. I certainly wasn't rich.

-Audiophiles care more about their equipment than music
Some do, most don't. The gear provides access, it's the portal through which we hear our music. The better the speakers, headphones, amplifier, turntable or digital converter, the better the music sounds. When I play a recording that I've enjoyed dozens of times over the years through a new speaker that reveals heretofore unheard details -- like the way the singer phrases a line, or the drummer accented the beat a certain way -- that's huge! The band may have struggled to get those things just so, but I might have never noticed those details before. Better gear might make the difference -- and in the end, the gear serves the music.

The top five myths about audiophiles

 

Simple.
If you seek to hear the best that the music in your collection has to offer with what gear you have then you are considered a audiophile.

Look man I was a audiophile in the 1960s with my Sears Silvertone.
And nobody can tell me different.
Period.

Don't be intimidated and do your own thing regardless.

This being said a true audiophile does seek to upgrade his gear whenever the opportunity arises.

My personal philosophy is your gear should be worth as much as your collection at the very least.

I never cared for labels anyway.

 

Tidal will tell you the same.

 

I'd say you're an audiophile. You are the perfect example of an audiophile with limited means, but the ears to put together a system that may be limited, but does well what it does do. And as long as the stuff mates together well, you can get very satisfying and natural sound with somewhat limited money. Going used or marked down can be fine. But you can also put equipment together that just doesn't sound good with each other. For example, you might have a bright sounding amp, but one that puts out music with great energy. A bright sounding set of speakers might have you and other listeners bolting out of the room. Or you might have a low-powered amp that sounds good, but you put it with an inefficient pair of speakers and the sound will be very, very dull. I actually rescued a Heathkit tubed integrated amp from a yard sale for $5. I put $4o into it to have it checked, clean it up, and put some fresh tubes in it. On the open market, I could sell it for close to $200. My speakers are, unfortunately, too inefficient for it. The Heathkit only puts out 15 watts per channel (which in solid state world, is equal to about 30 wpc). But my speakers are rated at 87dB. Even my 70wpc integrated, which sounds really good with the speakers, would be probably be better mated with a slightly more efficient pair.

Buy boy, you could put together a REALLY nice sounding system with a more efficient pair of speakers and that Heathkit. I love my current speakers too much and my Unison Research Unico is good enough to drive them, but the $45 I have in the Heathkit and then find a pair of speakers in the 93-100dB efficiency range and you'd have a GREAT budget system.

Zu Audio puts out very high efficiency speakers, for example. They're having a sale on the ones below starting at $1000. They're 98dB.

Omen Dirty Weekend [Mk.II]

The Heathkit amp will sound MUCH more musical than a $200 amp you'd get at Best Buy, and you'd have a very musical amp and speakers for $1200.

 

This is one of the few times I'll agree completely with Steve Guttenberg. The gear is there to allow what's in the recording and music to come through in a way that is enjoyable to the audiophile listener. The gear provides the access to what is in the recordings. It is up to the listener to find what's in the music.

Better gear provides better access. It is up to the listener to balance and optimize the level of access with the level of affordability. That balance is where things get interesting for audiophiles. I've certainly chosen a different balance and path than others will.

 

Yes - you can buy all the musically poor and sonically briliant audiophile releases

Limit yourself to those only

 

But I happen to really like Tibetan nose flute music with accentuated percussion transients that is recorded with only two microphones in an old abandoned church.

 

And we'll never know if you don't post your equipment in your profile (as has been asked by Steve Hoffman).

 

Getbettersound.com from Jim Smith is a good resource

So is The Complete Guide to High End Audio by Robert Harley

Both have inexpensive recommendations

Stretch your funds with select used equipment on audiogon or your local dealer

Don't look at the Best Buy schlock - good sound can be found in a reputable shop

Do your homework
Don't get enamored with a price, spec, sales pitch - use your own ears

Use your own ears

Synergy/high efficiency speakers etc

 

I hate the audiophile term, and never use it to describe myself.
To me it sounds wanky and pretentious.

I'm a music fan who has a moderate system, a decent physical collection of music......and I enjoy the hell out of it.