In any case, yeah, it’s a common trope that audiophiles are more interested in chasing quality of sound than quality of performance, but that’s a pretty unforgiving perspective.
I am going to have to agree with @edcyn on this.
It was very talented musician and recording engineer, Alan Parsons, who once said, "Audiophiles don’t use their equipment to listen to music. Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment”.
Well, he was wrong, when he said it.
It is flawed in several ways.
1st, it seems to be an example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. "I am an audiophile that always puts the music 1st. The gear is a tool to hear the music". "Well then, you aren’t a true audiophile. Audiophiles put the sound of their gear 1st".
2nd, is it seems to be creating a false dichotomy. Either, there are music lovers, or their are audiophile. If you are one of the above, you can’t be the other.
But here’s the thing. For 90% of the time when I listen to music, I hardly pay attention to the gear at all. I am completely involved in the music.
But, that’s not to say, for an hour or two a week, I can’t have loads of fun only paying attention to the gear. Swapping out gear, repositioning speakers, moving my room treatment around a bit, only playing audiophile approved recordings, etc., etc.
And finally, for the subset of audiophiles that do enjoy the gear more than the music itself... Why should anyone care how they enjoy the hobby?
I am a pretty regular poster on various audio forums, and there seems to be a feeling of superiority among those who claim audiophiles only like the gear. These same people will also claim not to be audiophiles, despite having quite high end systems.
All that being said, the essay itself was a fun read.