Why Aren't There Female Audiophiles?

[Duke]

At the end of the day, I can only speak from my own perspective, and I'm no more qualified to make generalizations than anyone else. If anything, I'm pitching in because this kind of topic comes up often in sociology, which is an area I've studied.

Well I never studied sociology so I'm even less qualified to make generalizations, but as you can see by glancing at the length of this post, lack of qualification hasn't deterred me.

I think music plays a unique role in the lives of many men: It is where we go to feel our feelings. It is socially acceptable for women to have emotions, to cry if they need to, but not for us guys. We can however listen to music and close our eyes and feel things deep and strong that we normally never allow ourselves to. Let me give an example:

My step-father was a career US Marine Corps pilot. He was a flight instructor during the Korean war, and flew both rotary and fixed-wing aircraft in Viet Nam (five tours). Among other things he attacked surface-to-air missile sites and radar-controlled anti-aircraft guns in a propeller-driven aircraft. He was in contention for Marine Corps judo champion in his weight class nearly every year, winning it once. When he was in his forties he had the highest score in his battalion on the physical fitness test, which means he was outscoring Marines half his age. He kept his emotions to himself, and I never saw him "lose control". He was a true professional warrior.

Knowing that he liked opera, one year (long after he retired) I gave him a pair of small Maggies and an NAD amp and CD player. I lied to him about the cost because I knew he'd refuse them otherwise. I set them up and put on a Cecelia Bartoli disc (she's an Italian opera singer). He and I sat there in silence for the next hour or so as we listened to the entire disc. When it was over, I was shocked to see him wiping tears from both of his eyes. During the fifty years I knew him that is the ONLY time I ever saw him cry, or even come close to crying. I was shocked, then it dawned on me: Music is where this old warrior went to feel his feelings.

I think that even for those of us males who are not Marine-Corps-level mas macho, music is a welcome refuge. I think women are much more likely to have OTHER places of safe refuge where they can go with their feelings. I'm not saying this is a complete explanation, but I think ONE of the reasons high-end audio attracts more men than women is because we're more likely to be in need of what music has to offer.

 

[raif71]

My wife like to listen to music and I would say more so than I. While I sometimes tend to listen objectively and scrutinizing "perceived" nuances in music, she just listen non-attentively and would sometime hum to herself. Ah ignorance is bliss or so it seems. My wife enjoys her music via her phone/tablet and cheap buds and I via DAP and gears with iems and headphones. After two decades with her, I can say she does not care about the joys of building DAC, Amps and selection of headphones. The WAF factor is that as long I don't make a mess of my gears in the living room, she won't say a thing and now since I've acquired a small room that used to be a storeroom for my audio thingies, I don't hear her mentioning boxes of gears and stuff lying around.

 

[MattHooper]

I'm loving ayane's input on this!

I really have no idea why there is such an achingly obvious disparity in the apparent interest of women vs men in high end audio. But..wow...is it ever there. There are certainly exceptions, but it is just so consistent that guys seem more interested in audio/video gear..in the gear itself.
I've known so many audiophiles and there isn't a single one whose partner was interested in the gear. Some were lucky enough to have a partner who would listen to the system sometimes and enjoy it, but gear talk? Zip.

As I said; I don't know why.

On one hand: I think we need to be very cautious about leaping to ascribe any such phenomena to biology. There have been so many bad (and often self-serving or pernicious) inferences made over the years about biology having set some characteristics in a man, woman, race, whatever.
You don't want to foreclose any changes, or hamstring them, by spreading the idea like "women are just wired to not like gear" because that will no doubt have some re-enforcing cultural feedback effect in which women who may have been interested would see it as out of bounds, or even some sign of "not being female enough." We've seen thankfully the rise in prominence of proud (self described) "female nerds" in technology areas that were once only male. That's great. (And of course you don't have to be a "nerd" to be in to science or technology).

On the other hand: We need to be cautious about over-ascribing things to to the software, e.g. culture. If something truly has a biological basis, while there may be exceptions, it may help explain some phenomena (and even help some people feel better in learning it). Biology is hella strong!
That is one of the primary lessons every parent learns when having kids, especially more than one. It's like people come out of the womb already a personality which can be amazingly intractable. My two sons have been utterly completely opposite personalities since they were tiny. Personality traits that come effortlessly to one of them still seem impossible for the other. So I think it's worth respecting the power of biology in setting traits of various sorts. Whether that pans out to something generalizable about men and women, I know there is some tantalizing research suggesting differences, but of course I don't really know the answer.

 

[HammerSandwich]

Wet-ass fidelity?

It's not really a marathon listening session without a diaper!

 

[tomelex]

I think audiophiles love gear and music and love to tinker with gear and music, kind of like a chef likes to tinker with a recipe and pots and other cooking tools. I think when folks are interested in something more than as a utility then they become "philes" of some sort of other. I don't really care how a car mechanically works ( even though I completed technical training in that area at one time) I just want to use the darn things, yeah its great to understand what is going on under the hood and all but cars are not really my hobby and i dont hang out with car guys.

My wife learned how to use my gear at the minimum level to play the system to enjoy the music. She listens to the big speaker system more than me these days, where i listen to smaller near field speakers in my study most of the time or on headphones.

I totally know, design and understand audio, down to the solder joint. Good for me, its my hobby. For Diana, its a tool to provide her with music she wants to listen to. She appreciates music as much if not more than I do, and she does it without knowing what is going on under the hood and although she recognizes good sound ( she plays records and digital) can she qualify as an audiophile without being "into" the gear?

To me, my definition of an audiophile, the folks i hang with, she would not qualify. She is an appliance operator.

Now, lets go out to the garden, or start naming trees and flowers and how they grow and what bird made what tune and a lot of other things, there i am just the appliance operator, i like flowers and all that but care not to go deeper really into all the details. i enjoy our garden but I am not turned on by it like she is, its not a passion, its not something I study and learn about, it does not excite my mind much.

So, for me, its your interest level in the gear, the reproduction system itself, that I consider as audiophile status. I think of the term as associated with gear, but that is just my definition, which probably is more in line by being called a "stereophile". So for me, male or female, if you like music, and if you like and understand the basics of gear, and you consider yourself a hobbyist of gear, then that's my take on audiophile.

In short, for me, if a woman showed up at a club meeting, and started talking distortion, component interactions, technology etc then there you have what I consider us to be: "stereophiles" My wife played in the school band and learned to read music and music history and all that, me, nothing, nada, so she is technically more schooled than I am in the audio arts, so does that qualify her as an audiophile, more than I am, I would say yes. But a "stereophile", no she aint that.

Oh, and by the way, we often get together and listen to music (from the home system) once a week or so, its one of the many "dates" we have, beside walking, watching TV together, gardening, going out to eat etc. I never discuss stereo technology, but we do discuss what we hear and the quality of the recording and so in that sense we are both audiophiles I suppose.

 

[ayane]

On one hand: I think we need to be very cautious about leaping to ascribe any such phenomena to biology. There have been so many bad (and often self-serving or pernicious) inferences made over the years about biology having set some characteristics in a man, woman, race, whatever.
You don't want to foreclose any changes, or hamstring them, by spreading the idea like "women are just wired to not like gear" because that will no doubt have some re-enforcing cultural feedback effect in which women who may have been interested would see it as out of bounds, or even some sign of "not being female enough." We've seen thankfully the rise in prominence of proud (self described) "female nerds" in technology areas that were once only male. That's great. (And of course you don't have to be a "nerd" to be in to science or technology).

On the other hand: We need to be cautious about over-ascribing things to to the software, e.g. culture. If something truly has a biological basis, while there may be exceptions, it may help explain some phenomena (and even help some people feel better in learning it). Biology is hella strong!

I think I like this take the best. It's the most skeptical approach. Sociology does not offer a rigorous theory of gender, not a comprehensive explanation of these observable phenomena, but neither does biology. We have to be careful and avoid jumping to conclusions. I do lean towards sociology when it comes to disparities between men and women, though. This is not only because of my lived experiences, but because the idea that sex, of all biological concepts, is strongly prescriptive of our individuality frightens me. It's an idea that has been used to justify sexism, and similar ideas have been used to justify other forms of discrimination, including racism. I prefer to think of body as correlated - but not strictly causally linked - to mind, because there are examples of different "kinds" of minds across all races/sexes. Unless there is unassailable evidence of software that only runs on the minds of one sex, it's better, socially, to encourage the idea of equality.

I think that even for those of us males who are not Marine-Corps-level mas macho, music is a welcome refuge. I think women are much more likely to have OTHER places of safe refuge where they can go with their feelings. I'm not saying this is a complete explanation, but I think ONE of the reasons high-end audio attracts more men than women is because we're more likely to be in need of what music has to offer.

This is a good observation. Men, unfortunately, have traditionally had fewer outlets for their feelings than women. I think as humans, our auditory hardware interfaces with the part of our brains that process emotions better than other stimuli, so it's a common refuge for many people who have limited havens for their feelings. Interestingly, music-listening is my favorite way to process too, haha

 

[daftcombo]

Uh… I know several women who have wives. We’ve been in the 21st century for a while now…

Yes and jokes are not as easy to understand now.

 

[stevenswall]

People being interested in people vs things perhaps? Could be nature or nurture, but it seems widely observed.

Cars, speakers, and boats are things... and the thing with speakers that could further distance females from them is the hobby isn't very social.

Maybe if that changed there would be wider interest not only among women but among younger people and the wider population: Making it more common to go over and listen to other systems, drink wine, paint, etc.

I'd love to see everyone put their city and state/province in forums and have a map generated of members... Allow members to select whether they are open to sharing their speaker systems with others, want to listen, host, etc.

Not sure what prevents that from happening but for some it seems they think they are a high priority target for a hitman or that murder is highly likely if someone knows the region they are in an sorts through millions of people looking for "Arcgraggr 5432Blfd" and passing around a picture of a purple cartoon dog that is their profile picture.

 

[audiofooled]

IMHO, men like to know how things work and will debate to the best of their knowledge about anything that involves any kind of technology they know at least something about, be it their hobby or not. We often develop this during early childhood.
Women, on the other hand, like to keep it simple and expect any kind of technology to just work as it should, which is fine. If it works, why debating about it when you can just use it? If I take it to the extremes, I once sat in the passenger seat with a woman who was a rally champion. When I started to get technical and ask about her car setup, she just said men in her team do that, she doesn't need to... The car works, it doesn't break down, and she can drive very well... Simple as that.
Audio on a level we are talking about over here is a combination of too many components which more often than not, don't work as stated, how they work is hard to comprehend, and frankly, the design of any of them is more appealing to the eyes of men. And it can get very expensive. So why getting involved in something which costs a lot, doesn't look as much, takes a lot of space and doesn't do what it should for the money?
Women care about music as much as we do, like to hear great sound and very well recognize it when they actually hear it. But the way to actually get there... Let's face it, the journey is hard and it takes some real motivation besides just love for music. A lot of men don't even care about this hobby. Women have better things to do other than selecting components and playing with a 100 lbs speaker or subwoofer placement. Things we take for granted. Perhaps, they would spend some money on a pair of good headphones and a good headphone amplifier, this will work and this is as complicated as it should get. Until the technology allows for less cables and components and provides the experience in a less expensive and less complicated manner, I think we can't blame the women for keeping their distance. And I won't even start on the way us men debate about things online.

 

[izeek]

IMHO, men like to know how things work and will debate to the best of their knowledge about anything that involves any kind of technology they know at least something about, be it their hobby or not. We often develop this during early childhood.
Women, on the other hand, like to keep it simple and expect any kind of technology to just work as it should, which is fine. If it works, why debating about it when you can just use it? If I take it to the extremes, I once sat in the passenger seat with a woman who was a rally champion. When I started to get technical and ask about her car setup, she just said men in her team do that, she doesn't need to... The car works, it doesn't break down, and she can drive very well... Simple as that.
Audio on a level we are talking about over here is a combination of too many components which more often than not, don't work as stated, how they work is hard to comprehend, and frankly, the design of any of them is more appealing to the eyes of men. And it can get very expensive. So why getting involved in something which costs a lot, doesn't look as much, takes a lot of space and doesn't do what it should for the money?
Women care about music as much as we do, like to hear great sound and very well recognize it when they actually hear it. But the way to actually get there... Let's face it, the journey is hard and it takes some real motivation besides just love for music. A lot of men don't even care about this hobby. Women have better things to do other than selecting components and playing with a 100 lbs speaker or subwoofer placement. Things we take for granted. Perhaps, they would spend some money on a pair of good headphones and a good headphone amplifier, this will work and this is as complicated as it should get. Until the technology allows for less cables and components and provides the experience in a less expensive and less complicated manner, I think we can't blame the women for keeping their distance. And I won't even start on the way us men debate about things online.

That last line.

 

[board]

Soooo ... here's the answer you've all been waiting for, and yes, I did watch the video.
I believe it's waaaaay more simple than the overly complicated hypotheses of "social conditioning", "oppression", "male hostility", "what we've been taught", "old boys' club" or whatever, and yes, the reason is mainly biological:

One of the most scientifically well-established differences between men and women is that men are more interested in things and systems than people, and women are more interested in people than things and systems. So the people at the far-end of the curve for people more interested in things and systems will almost exclusively be men, hence why there are more male audiophiles, audio engineers (engineers in general, really), train conductors, car mechanics, theoretical physicists, etc.

Also, when sexual reproduction (rather than asexual replication) started in animal species around 800 million years ago, one gender specialized in caring, and the other specialized in competing. While the females are not more caring and the males more competitive in every single species, then it is like that in most animal species, and humans is one of the species where this is the case.
Men are physically bigger than women because men compete with each other physically (fight) for access to mates, since the general rule is that it's the female, not the male, who chooses her partner. This is because of a general principle in biology: Sperm is cheap, and eggs are expensive. If one man has sex with 50 women in one year he can potentially have 50 children. If one woman has sex with 50 men in one year she can have maximum one child. No more. So females, on average, can afford to be picky, while males, on average, can't.
So men have specialized more in competing, and almost any type of competition, be it audio gear, football, art collecting, extreme ironing, doll house collecting, eating metal, etc. is dominated by competitive men, not by women. The area where women compete with each other is mainly in the looks department, since this is what attracts the most mates for them.
Look up Darwinian philosopher and zoologist Helena Cronin, both her articles and her Youtube videos. She gives a good explanation of this in practically every video I've seen by her (as well as in most of her articles).

Simon Baron-Cohen, who's a very well-respected researcher at Cambridge University in the UK, did research where he did two things:
1: Showed a mechanical object and a face to one-day old babies. The boys preferred to look at the mechanical object, while the girls preferred to look at the face.
2: He measured the testosterone levels in unborn fetuses, and the higher the testosterone level in the fetus, whether male or female, the more interested in things and systems rather than people the child would be later in life.
So, although the females with the highest levels of testosterone never have testosterone levels as high as the males with the lowest levels of testosterone, these high-level testosterone females tend to be more tomboys than other females: More interested in things and systems and more competitive than average for women.

And we can even go further back in time, to before "we" were humans: In an experiment monkeys were given "typical" male and female toys to play with: dolls and trucks. The male monkeys preferred to play with the trucks, and the female monkeys preferred to play with the dolls.

And yes, of course I would be happy to share my sources for all this .

 

[Marc v E]

Most men are naturally born tinkerers; most women are not.

In a nutshell, this is the true answer. You could ask the same question about cars or about other kinds of "gadgets". Our brains are different. This is a fact, and it isn't mainly about differences in upbringing and societal expectations and so on. Our brains are different. Men naturally tend to be gadget freaks of one sort or another. Women generally do not have that same natural predisposition. I'm only speaking the truth. Not that there aren't exceptions. Obviously the exceptions are numerous. On the whole, men are naturally born tinkerers and gadget freaks; on the whole women do not share this same predisposition. Also, for anyone who hasn't noticed this and who doubts that our brains are different, you may have noticed at some point that men do not generally have the same strong design to get pregnant a bunch of times and raise a bunch of children. If our brains were the same we'd be the same in this respect, but on the whole we are very different in this respect.

I completely agree. Based on observing my daughter and son, he approaches me and looks what is made, while she looks at who is making it. In other words: if you say you organize parties, many women will attend. They will even be interested if you say you regularly go to concerts and ask you who was there.

While on the other hand, if you say you love audiophile gear, who is gonna care?

 

[Ramon Cota]

If women were genuinely interested in audio gear or music beyond shallow pop they wouldn't have any problem having female audio circles , meetings , forums where men would not be welcome.With today's aggressive feminism ruling societies and all the affirmative actions they have no problem getting in previously male dominated areas as STEM,software etc( actually they have it much easier than men ). So why would audio be any different ? They only get into male things when there is easy money to be made ... and audiophilia is a way to spend too much money on things they dont care about.

 

[Wolf]

In my family growing up, music was experienced. Both of my parents sang formerly in church/school, played instruments, and the radio was always on! On dad's side, Grandpa once sang in church, and my Grandma loved Lawrence Welk and the Grand Ol Opry. Mom's side, most my aunts and uncles played instruments, but I don't know that G n G played anything. Grandpa liked old country western like Roy Roger's, and Grandma liked hymns.

My dad listened to records as a young adult, but mom was the one who put forth getting the pieced Pioneer system they had for a long time. Dad eventually blew the Lloyd's speakers. She collected a bunch of vinyl over the years, even storybooks with records for my sister and me. The radio was always on, unless the TV was. I would call my mom an audiophile, as she enjoyed music.

That resulted in my sister and I also playing instruments and enjoying music. My sister is content with speakers I made and gave her, and the files on her phone. Simple receiver, and maybe a sub down the road for movies. I'm the audiophile of the 2 of us.

I think it also comes down to what is required of the person to enjoy the music. Modern times make it easily accessible. BT phone and go with minimal home/car appliances, or spinning discs with a little more relaxed mantra; I think the lifestyle we all engage in also highly reflects the suitability of how stark our audio electronic delving becomes. Of a lot of women I know, having things accomplished more efficiently or expediently makes more sense, and therefore a BT system fits the bill. They also don't care about differences in a song master or format if it's the same song they can smile and sing their head off with, enjoying the music as intended.

 

[GeorgeWalk]

Maybe women just don't want to get caught up in cable measuring contests?

 

[MattHooper]

There's the old saying:

A woman presented with a technology asks "What can this do for me?'

A man presented with a technology asks: "What can this do?"

A generalization of course, but gets at this observation that more women *seem* to be interested in the utility of a technological object "what do I need this for? What will it do for me?" vs the man being fascinated by the technology itself and it's possibilities.

So for instance, our universal remote control: My wife just wants to know what it's useful for "This button turns on all the stuff so I can watch TV? Fine." End of interest. But for me I'm like "Wow, cool gadget. I wonder how much I can DO with this? How much can I manipulate it's capabilities, what can I control?" Hence I spent a great deal of time on forums discussing with other videophiles...virtually all men...the ins and outs of programming remotes, comparing remotes, learning the limits and capabilities of the technology to exploit etc.

Once again, it's a generalisation with exceptions (I mean, clearly there are many women working in technology, and in technology sciences etc, plus I know at least one woman who programmed the family remote), but the above saying does seem to capture a trend, whatever the explanation.

 

[David Harper]

maybe women are just smarter than men.

 

[Wes]

I bet the women lurking here will not post much on this thread

 

[_thelaughingman]

I think women enjoy their music differently without having to go all ape and get into a one upping contest with other set of ovaries.

 

[Thomas_A]

There are many women musicians. How do they want their music to sound?

And what is the proportion of female studio workers? I have no idea.