• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

I'm tired of audiophile and high fidelity confusion.

Inner Space

Active Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
284
Likes
414
I think it is up to the consumer (audiophile, audiophool, purist or 'don't care') what direction they want to take buying their gear.
I agree, of course, but I'm endlessly fascinated by the reasons behind the various directions. Mostly by the emotional confusion of the delivery system with the thing being delivered. For example, I was just on a Zoom with a guy I know who dresses beautifully. Casual style, but he really cares. As a broad analogy, he gets the same type of pleasure out of clothes that I get out of music.

So how did he choose his washing machine? He probably checked for the cycles he wanted, looked for electricity consumption, checked for water usage, and whatever came top of the spreadsheet, he bought. No magic. No emotional confusion between the machine and the pleasure. Why don't people think of hi-fi the same way? A stereo is an appliance, after all, like anything else.

I just think there's an undisputable line between objectives and measurable performances and subjectives and pleasurable to hearing equipments.
Why the hard line between the two? What about an excellent system by objective and measurable standards that is also "pleasurable to hearing"? They're very common. Some might say one aspect depends on the other. Do you think they're necessarily opposed?
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #125
@Inner Space Not necessarily. I'm talking about audiophile marketing that rely on hearing. That is obviously not objective. They can find nice balance between sound pleasure and fidelity of reproduction. But you ain't get for sure a technical and measurable state of the art equipment regarding best fidelity of reproduction. It can please you but you can't prentend you have both. An honest balance maybe between objective and subjective choice. Just not both at the same time.
 

raistlin65

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
988
Likes
1,271
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
I'm going to throw this out there. My definition of audiophile

Someone who pursues, as a hobby, good sound quality from recorded music.

"Good sound quality" is a general term so that it can include a lot of people:

That person who is slowly building out their multi-channel audio set up to 9.2.4 so that they can listen to stereo recordings upmixed with Auro 3D.

The person who owns three headphones with very different sound signatures. One for emphasizing female vocals. Another for emphasizing lead guitar. And a bass heavy set for feeling like they're in the club when they're listening to hip hop and EDM.

And, while I will never understand it, the person that collects cassette tapes and is into finding the best vintage cassette player they can. But more power to them if that's what floats their boat.

Hey, I know this doesn't agree with the traditional elite definition of the audiophile focused on an extremely expensive two-channel audio setup, who only listens to the best masters. But I think it's time we moved beyond the exclusivity of how it used to be defined.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,599
Likes
3,065
@Inner Space Not necessarily. I'm talking about audiophile marketing that rely on hearing. That is obviously not objective. They can find nice balance between sound pleasure and fidelity of reproduction. But you ain't get for sure a technical and measurable state of the art equipment regarding best fidelity of reproduction. It can please you but you can't prentend you have both. An honest balance maybe between objective and subjective choice. Just not both at the same time.
I dont think audiophile marketing relies on hearing. I think it relies on suggestion. Psychology. not audiology.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #128
I dont think audiophile marketing relies on hearing. I think it relies on suggestion. Psychology. not audiology.
When I say it rely on hearing I exactly mean what you say as a consequence. Hearing is mostly driven by emotions. If you are a trained listener it get better. But still it's not completely objective.
 

Blumlein 88

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
9,874
Likes
13,360
What about a recording never in a studio. Though rare something like Wilson audio recordings. Set mike's. Recorded with no compression, eq or other processing. Then edited only start and stop points. No studio version to copy the gear. We know stereo cannot replicate reality. All you can do is playback with transparent gear.
 

watchnerd

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
8,578
Likes
5,081
Location
Seattle Area, USA
What about a recording never in a studio. Though rare something like Wilson audio recordings. Set mike's. Recorded with no compression, eq or other processing. Then edited only start and stop points. No studio version to copy the gear. We know stereo cannot replicate reality. All you can do is playback with transparent gear.
I have a few minimalist recordings like that, including some I've made myself.

Some binaural.

As a reference recording, I like them because there are fewer variables to listen through. It's easy to focus on what is going right or wrong with less masking.

But as musical entertainment, I don't necessarily find them superior to more complex mic'ing and production.
 

Inner Space

Active Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
284
Likes
414
But you ain't get for sure a technical and measurable state of the art equipment regarding best fidelity of reproduction. It can please you but you can't prentend you have both.
Why not? Take me as a data point. My current system measures superbly - objectively, I doubt any could measure better - and it's in the best room I ever had. If Amir and Floyd Toole came over, they'd be thrilled. And believe me, it pleases me. It's off the scale in enjoyment and euphoria. Conclusion: you can have both. Extra possible conclusion: you can't have one without the other.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #132
Why not? Take me as a data point. My current system measures superbly - objectively, I doubt any could measure better - and it's in the best room I ever had. If Amir and Floyd Toole came over, they'd be thrilled. And believe me, it pleases me. It's off the scale in enjoyment and euphoria. Conclusion: you can have both. Extra possible conclusion: you can't have one without the other.
I have never said that a great fidelity reproduction equipments can't please you. I personally think that is mostly probable in my opinion. To be honest I think that you could be pleased by another equipment with great measurements like yours.
 

Jimbob54

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
3,599
Likes
3,065
Stop sniggering at the back. This is a serious discussion.
 
OP
D

diegooo1972

Active Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
174
Likes
172
Thread Starter #135
Why not? Take me as a data point. My current system measures superbly - objectively, I doubt any could measure better - and it's in the best room I ever had. If Amir and Floyd Toole came over, they'd be thrilled. And believe me, it pleases me. It's off the scale in enjoyment and euphoria. Conclusion: you can have both. Extra possible conclusion: you can't have one without the other.
For example Mola Mola Tambaqui is audiophile but also have great measurements. There are obviously other equipments like that. But they are measurable. That's my point. The difference between measurable equipments and listening created equipments. As long as they are measurable they can be fine. When they can't be measured and rely on hearing only they are not an objective choice but an emotional choice. Two different path. That said I put Tambaqui in measurable equipments and not in the emotinal chosen equipments.
 
Top Bottom