No Longer an Audiophile...

[Midwest Blade]

...a friend of ours knows I am into audio gear and this past week asked me to give him a hand. He's into headphones but now wants to put together a 2 way system for listening. So he asks "your an audiophile, right?" and I respond "not really, I am now more of a audio scientist".

Anyways, found that he was heading astray, mainly from what he was reading online. After a lengthy chat and some recomendations I think he will be okay.

 

[VintageFlanker]

So he asks "your an audiophile, right?" and I respond "not really, I am now more of a audio scientist".

I guess I'm no longer an audiophile as well (Or just thinking about still being one drives me crazy). Better went that way before I turned 30...

Hum... I have few fun facts, even considering my "young" age. :

- Signed a contract with one of my ex girlfriend saying "No Hi-Fi upgrade for the next five years"... I broke it when we broke up.

- Spend a ton of time reading reviews about power chords... Then building myself the ideal one, with OCC connectors and OCC conductor. I still have it.

- Believed the sound was better using XLR, only because the voltage was twice the regular RCA 2V.

- Believed in burn-in for cables (if so many people said it exists, it must be, right?)

- Bought many DACs only based on subjective reviews saying "It sounds better than a lot of products that cost XXX€s more".

- Believed that last sentence for many many things. Now, I get sick each time I read it.

- Then, I have chosen to make a break... few times later, I've been saved by ASR.

Alright folks,

It's time for me to tell the whole story I've been through... the one about audiophile BS cables .

My sickness changed a bit in the last few years. I discovered ASR in 2018, but was a reader of Audioholics and Archimago before. I'm not that old, and my journey in High-Fidelity only started twelve years ago. Since the beginning, I always doubted about audiophile myths, but were wrongly thinking the majority must have been right. I took me several years to understand that Audio is not a democracy. Objective performance is a proved fact and not subject to personnal preferences.
However... I stayed stupid and still want to test a massive amount of gear over and over...
The main difference today is: I will never buy again something which hasn't been properly measured somewhere.

Almost everybody here made this kind of AB comparaison (with or without friends) a ton of times. Look at my first posts on ASR. I was talking about a sighted AB comparaison between my ADI-2 DAC and my Qutest when I could hear differences. People pointed that it was not level matched. Later, wasn't able to tell the difference once the ADI-2 was set on 2V, not to mention if the test was blind.

 

[pozz]

Kind of a shame what the word has been through.

Maybe philosonus? philaudion? phono sapien?

Shame that "phonology" has been taken over by linguistics, otherwise an audio scientist could easily be a phonologist, and an audio engineer (machinator) would be one practising the ars phonologia (ars in the sense of technique).

 

[CDMC]

I haven’t been an “audiophile” for at least 20 years. To ke the word conjures up images of a group of old men quietly discussing the magical properties of some esoteric device to recreate the live sound of a nose whistle.

 

[IndividualWay7]

Audiophile to me only screams, People who have to make up terms like mid fi to justify the jump of a CA andro, HD800 and few speakers. Defend the inferior vinyl, Think 24/96 is better than 16/44 and much more.

 

[RayDunzl]

Sorry, you're still an audiophile, until the dictionaries are updated.

 

[tmtomh]

I'm not inclined to cede the term audiophile to the hyper-subjectivists, so I'm still an audiophile. There's a long and honorable tradition in audiophile history of solid engineering, and I personally don't want to let go of that by distancing myself from the term.

 

[JJB70]

I'm not inclined to cede the term audiophile to the hyper-subjectivists, so I'm still an audiophile. There's a long and honorable tradition in audiophile history of solid engineering, and I personally don't want to let go of that by distancing myself from the term.

Well said. I find it slightly sad that audiophile is now synonymous with snake oil buying quackery and more expensive = better idiocy. I am profoundly cynical of the audio industry and view audio gear as a tool to enable me to enjoy music but I think my interest in good sound quality and love of classic audio gear still makes me an audiophile. We should be able to use the word without being embarrassed because we risk being grouped in with a crazy fringe.

 

[DonH56]

From Mirriam-Webster:

au·dio·phile | \ ˈȯ-dē-ō-ˌfī(-ə)l \​

Definition of audiophile​

: a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction​

Fits all of us, I think, no matter how we think others have corrupted the meaning. I say stick with it and let them know that, just because you believe in measurements, does not mean you do not believe in high fidelity sound reproduction.

Last week one of my coworkers and I were discussing playing music and recording techniques. He plays guitar and has a little home studio. He was telling me about one of his friends who could not believe he was an engineer, could not understand how making music (creative, from the soul) could exist in an engineer (analytical, technical)... Another area where people invent dichotomies and apply stereotypes that don't exist.

 

[SIY]

Last week one of my coworkers and I were discussing playing music and recording techniques. He plays guitar and has a little home studio. He was telling me about one of his friends who could not believe he was an engineer, could not understand how making music (creative, from the soul) could exist in an engineer (analytical, technical)... Another area where people invent dichotomies and apply stereotypes that don't exist.

The two best guitarists I’ve ever known:

1. Lead guitarist in several bands I played in. Uncanny ability to hear a song once, then play it back perfectly. Wrote brilliant songs. Gave lessons to Nils Lofgren. Refused to turn pro and instead got a PhD in high energy physics from Stanford.

2. Electronics geek, ham radio operator. Ended up playing guitar with John Mayall, Harvey Mandel, Sugarcane Harris, and Canned Heat. Pioneered the two hand tapping method. Gave it up to be a network specialist, coder, and all-around software guru.

 

[Eirikur]

I haven’t been an “audiophile” for at least 20 years. To me the word conjures up images of a group of old men quietly discussing the magical properties of some esoteric device to recreate the live sound of a nose whistle.

Have I got the song for those audiosaurs

 

[daftcombo]

I think we here are mostly about "having the cleanest sound possible from a scientifical point of view" rather than about if the sound is good or not. Audioscientists.

 

[AdamS]

The two best guitarists I’ve ever known:

1. Lead guitarist in several bands I played in. Uncanny ability to hear a song once, then play it back perfectly. Wrote brilliant songs. Gave lessons to Nils Lofgren. Refused to turn pro and instead got a PhD in high energy physics from Stanford.

2. Electronics geek, ham radio operator. Ended up playing guitar with John Mayall, Harvey Mandel, Sugarcane Harris, and Canned Heat. Pioneered the two hand tapping method. Gave it up to be a network specialist, coder, and all-around software guru.

And there's Brian May from Queen who is one of the best rock guitarist of all time, and he got his PhD in astrophysics later in life.

 

[DonH56]

I think we here are mostly about "having the cleanest sound possible from a scientifical point of view" rather than about if the sound is good or not. Audioscientists.

I agree with the first but not the latter. "Good sound" is subjective in so many ways, from the colorations we may like, to the type of music we appreciate. There are other places to discuss "good sound"; it is less discussed here because we are focused at ASR on the scientific merits, not because we don't care about "good sound". I would agree we are focused upon measurably best sound but not "rather than" what we consider "good sound", e.g. perfect reproduction no matter how imperfect the sound. And I strongly resist the notion, espoused by so many subjective sites, that love of science and love of good sound (music, whatever) are opposites.

 

[Eirikur]

I think we here are mostly about "having the cleanest sound possible from a scientifical point of view" rather than about if the sound is good or not. Audioscientists.

I'm not. A good measuring product, close to specs, is a great starting point for selecting gear candidates. Next is listening!