Are you too old to be an audiophile?

I believe the mark of any music lover leans toward trained hearing, not (necessarily) top hearing performance. Most of us have no better or worse hearing than the average person. However, unlike the average person, our ear-brain connections have become more discriminating, focused, and appreciative over the years.
An analogy: We can SEE everything that a crime scene detective sees, but unlike us, he immediately recognizes clues and valuable information. His vision is no better than ours, just well-trained.
That said, at 56 I can still hear butterflies land in my neighbor's yard. ; )

@Jax2 You either don't get it, or as just trolling, not sure which... But if you are legitimately trying to understand my point, read Douglas Schroeder's posts. He gets it. You keep harping on the "neutral" thing. Forget I said that. I don't use an EQ either so you can stop harping on that too. I don't see how you don't understand how hearing loss can affect one's ability to judge a system. Not saying there is a prize for it, or that having "perfect" hearing is all that matters, just that the ABILITY to HEAR matters. In math, sometimes the easiest way to see how variables will affect a function is to put in variables that represent an extreme. So let's assume someone can only hear between 250hz and 2kz. Still gonna tell me it doesnt matter? I mean no offense to you if you are not trolling just trying to elicit a reaction, but I truly do not understand how you do not understand this point.

@Dan_ed I chose that topic so people would read it. It is meant to sound controversial to grab people's attention.

Are you too deaf to be an audiophile? You can be. If you can't hear audio is of no importance to you.
Too poor? I would say no, although obviously in extreme cases the answer is yes. No money? No system at all.
Too stupid? Based on some of the responses I've gotten, I'm going to have to go with no. You can never be too stupid to be an audiophile. :) Before anyone jumps on that.. It's a joke people. But obviously you can never be too irrational to still be an audiophile. How else do you justify $20K speaker wire.

I am not saying I know more about high end audio than anyone on this board. I don't. You can see some of my other posts to see what my system is, and I know it's not great, but its just my starting point. I am sure that with experience you get better at building a better system, learning what you like, etc.. however one chooses to word it. My main point is that I will read people talking about the most minute details of their system, or the room, or whatever, but ignoring the fact that their hearing is the ultimate variable. You can't tell me that the frequencies above 10, 12, 14khz don't matter. Granted, to those who can't hear above that, they dont, and those frequencies arent important in building a system (for themselves), but what if you can hear above 14 or 15 or 16 or 18 khz? What if your system is always outputting a 110db sound at 40khz?? Wouldn't bother you, or anyone else for that matter, but your dog would be going nuts! Im not arguing that the midrange isn't important. I'm not saying that there is much music 'up there' or that they are my favorite frequencies.
I don't understand why you think it's a topic that's hard to take seriously, but I agree with you that it sounds like most people are starting to worry. Most of the responses seem defensive to a question that was meant to be for fun.

Obviously, with age comes experience (and the ability to build a better audio system) but not logic. With the exception of Douglas Schroeder, everyone here seems to think that the cables, power chords, window treatments, exact speaker placement, the type of knot in the rug covering their floor, the stands, spikes, etc etc, matter, but that their hearing, and any hearing loss they make experience with age, doesnt. What sense does this make?? None.

This actually goes to something much deeper.

Taken from wikipedia "Audiophile":
Criticisms usually focus on claims around so-called "tweaks" and accessories beyond the core source, amplification, and speaker products. Examples of these accessories include speaker cables, component interconnects, stones, cones, CD markers, and power cables or conditioners.[15] Manufacturers of these products often make strong claims of actual improvement in sound but do not offer any measurements or testable claims. This absence of measurable (rather than subjective) improvement, coupled with sometimes high prices, raises questions about the truthfulness of the marketing.[16]
Roger Russell – a former engineer and speaker designer for McIntosh Labs – describes the introduction of expensive speaker wire brands, and critiques their performance in his online essay called Speaker Wire - A History. He writes, "The industry has now reached the point where [wire] resistance and listening quality are not the issues any more, although listening claims may still be made....The strategy in selling these products is, in part, to appeal to those who are looking to impress others with something unique and expensive."[16]
Skeptic James Randi, through his foundation, has offered a prize of $1 million to anyone who can demonstrate that $7,250 audio cables "are any better than ordinary audio cables".[17] In 2008, audio reviewer Michael Fremer attempted to claim the prize, and said that Randi declined the challenge.[18] Randi said that the cable manufacturer Pearl was the one who withdrew.[19]
----

@Altbrewer You bring up a very interesting point about "live music." I feel like this is completely different topic unto itself but a very interesting one. In my experience, a recording sounding "live" or like "real music" has more to do with how it was recorded and people's natural "expectations." By "expectations" I mean, how your brain subconsciously expects it to sound in the room you are currently in. I say this because I am a musician and record music. There have been times I have recorded things (with cheap equipment) and played it back over my "system" and thought it was real. As in, when I heard the voice I literally thought it was in the room with me. When I say cheap, I mean the mic on my laptop, or an inexpensive condenser mic, and when I say "system" I mean my computer speakers. I have accomplished this with "good" equipment too, but to me the ability for a recording to sound "real" has much more to do with how it was recorded than how it is played back.

As for hearing loss, I totally agree with you.. it sounds good to you.. that truly is all that matters :)

I often find it interesting, and telling, to look at the posting history of participants in a thread; particularly when there is disagreement. In the case of this thread, there are two posters, Douglas Schroeder, and Farmajed, who share a strong dissenting view. If one looks at their posting history, one notices that in the case of Douglas there are many posts in threads about equipment and technical matters, and only three posts in threads about music. In the case of Farmajed, not a single post about music.

Dan_ed, I'm not sure why you find it so difficult to see that for some of us the question of hearing acuity and age is important. You say, "...I do think this is a topic that is hard to take seriously. It sounds more like some of you guys who are just starting to realize that you are getting older are starting to worry. Most people are much more interested in what their health will be, or what sex will be like. ;-)"

This IS an audiophile forum, not a general health or sexual health forum. It is perfectly natural for a person who is keenly involved in music and audio systems to wonder about age related effects on listening and enjoyment of the system. That is especially so if the person is younger, getting interested in establishing a rig, and has reasons to wonder about the guidance he might receive - as seems to be the case with our OP.

Seeing approximately half of the audiophiles who have passed through the door of my listening room and turned out to have significant hearing loss (shared in discussion, usually only after I point out some nuances in the music/system which they cannot hear, but which others who hear the same music readily discern) the question of the impact of potential hearing loss arises.

The difficulty of this issue of hearing loss does impact real world decisions on setting up systems. About 7 years ago I stopped at an audio shop which was steeped in the Quad/Naim tradition. The two store reps were helpful and showed me some CL-3 rated in-wall cabling I could use to wire my surrounds in my HT I was building. I appreciated the discussion but was quite surprised to see that they were using the very same in-wall cabling for their main two channel rig in the store and I questioned it.

Their response was that they had conducted comparisons; the CL-3 was as good as any higher end speaker cable. I mentioned my speaker cable at home and they fairly dismissed it. I decided that since it was not terribly cheap and the amount I needed was nearly the entire spool I would buy it all and use the few extra feet to conduct a test of my own between my speaker cables and the CL-3. I had come to the conclusion years before that cabling was significant in influencing sound, so this would be a good price/performance test.

The CL-3 was crap; it had the effect of turning my system into a giant boom box, worse in every appreciable way. Reinstalling my speaker cables was like breathing life back into a dead body, the difference was that profound. My conclusion was two-fold; those men could not hear for sh_t, and I would never go to them again for anything related to advice in establishing an audio system. It seems they believed they were really sharp, avoiding the costly cable in order to get what was to their ears the same result. They thought they were doing me a favor by giving me such inside information.

I learned through that relatively inexpensive lesson that anyone in the audio industry can be subject to grave error in their recommendations and or handicap in hearing. Having such an experience I vowed that I, from conducting listening tests, would be the arbiter of what form my rig would take. Had I been a newbie and simply accepted their conclusion based on authority my system would have been compromised and had I not put their advice to the test it might be compromised indefinitely.

Perhaps there is no perfect standard somewhere, but in the real world of audio system building when someone gives you advice which worsens your rig it becomes a perfectly good reason to avoid their advice. They said they had listened and done the comparisons and could hear no difference. My only logical conclusion is that they were hearing impaired, leading to a poor recommendation. After all, they seemed sincere; they could have sold more expensive cables to customers they said. It seems they literally could not hear a compelling reason to do so. All their customers were shorted in helpful system building advice.

It was the very kind of experience that perhaps Farjamed dreads, getting guidance from someone who is incapable of giving the best guidance. It is a real possibility.

Does hearing acuity matter? You bet. Would I take unweighted system building advice from someone I suspect has a hearing impediment. Absolutely not.

I should have also pointed out that in the case of the posting history of posters holding the other (majority) viewpoint, there is a far greater percentage of posts about music in relation to posts about gear.

Mijs, Bravo!

Frogman, yes, I would assume there is a natural shift toward media and the experience as one gets older. I just chatted with an industry professional the other day who repairs/restores rather large speakers. He recalled the big monsters which he used to use in his main system, but has scaled back his rig. Why? He's getting to the point where he doesn't want to deal with the size of them. Instead of pushing for ultimate performance he is talking about accepting compromises. For whatever reason we all have to do so at some point.

With age I can certainly see that one's emphasis would tilt toward the "leave well enough alone," perspective even when hearing loss is not an issue. When space or energy no longer allow for mucking with the gear what can one turn to as a means of keeping the audiophile fire burning? An endless source of new experiences in music, a tremendously fulfilling alternative to the hunt for the gear. :)

@Frogman Not sure what your point is. I don't come on here to talk to people about music. I like what I like, I don't need people's opinions on music. I do however need opinions on gear because it's impossible to test out every possibility and because people on here know a lot more about what gear is available out there than I do, and how it might be paired to achieve desirable results. Ultimately it is my opinion what sounds good to my ears, but again, as Douglas Schroeder astutely points out, I would like to know if I am taking advice from a buncha deaf old guys with different priorities because of physical limitations. Why is it so hard for people to admit that the ability to HEAR plays at least some role in all of this?
As for the fact that most people are in disagreement with me and Douglas.. again, what is your point? Being in the majority doesn't make you right.

@Mijs, I totally agree with you, and you make a great analogy with the crime scene.

their hearing is the ultimate variable.

However, it is a variable over which we have no control. It MAY (emphasis on MAY) explain some strong differences of opinion over particular pieces of gear, but since there is little I can do about it, and since it is an immutable facet in my perception of sound, I'm not gonna worry too much about it. IOW, I'm gonna trust MY ears, even if they no longer work for $hit due to age and too much R&R in my 'ute ;~)I guess what I am trying to say is that my perception of the music I hear when I sit down tonight is a product of the interaction of the software, each piece of hardware, those little cilia in my cochlea, and my brain. Your perception will not and cannot be the same as mine, unless we are identical twins, with identical environmental exposures, listening to the same recording at the same time. BTW, I accept and respect your explanation of the thread title as an attention getter, but I also understand Dan-ed's taking issue w it. Us old coots can get pretty testy.

Thanks Farjamed and Frogman...

I like that crime scene analogy, too. I also think our sense of (audible) contrast is more developed than most. Just like a photographers sense of color contrast is better than non-photographers. It's all about the ear-to-brain or eye-to-brain connections.

When my wife asks me to listen to a noise at night, I don't listen for the noise, I listen to the quiet. Better contrast.

Yes, Farjamed, we should not loose respect for our audiophile elders; they do have a tremendous amount of wisdom, and also experience with gear that is invaluable.

Perhaps I was a bit too harsh on the guys at the Quad/Naim dealership in saying I would never return. They were 1.5 hours away, so dismissing it was relatively easy. Very likely I would have visited again over time had they been local. Just because one has some hearing difficulty does not render their opinion or experience of no value.

It's difficult to admit hearing limitations because the entire audiophile culture is built upon hearing well - hearing "good" (left to one's own interpetation) music, hearing it on a good system, hearing it in a good environment, hearing it with good company, hearing it with good ears as well, to a degree. Advice is assumed to be given on the basis of good hearing, which it clearly cannot always be.

A point in favor of the "buncha deaf old guys," one of whom I may be some day; their experience IS very valuable and one must sift out the wheat from the chaff. They often have a huge knowledge base of technical information about what components and speakers go best with each other, what systems are better for different kinds of music (especially if one is focusing on a specific genre of music), how different media are recorded and might sound played back, etc. Turning your back on such knowledge would be a big mistake. Listen to them and take the experience. Be willing to try a recommendation but don't be surprised if you hear something different than described once in a while. It goes with the territory.

After my frustrating experience with the CL-3 cable I by no means wrote off all older audiophiles. Some of the most beautiful and insightful thoughts have come from those who have been in the game longer than I have. I simply enforced a rule that I would weigh advice given differently if I learned that hearing loss was a factor. With time you find out who hears things similar to you and who does not. I would go so far as to say that the differences between what an individual who selects a certain type of technology, say speakers, can be more opposed to one's style of listening than whether or not they have some hearing loss.

I'm not intending to give the impression that hearing acuity is the biggest factor in finding a mentor. I believe it counts, but there are many reasons to hold in esteem audio elders and consider their advice. Simply conduct your own tests and reach your own conclusions, and eventually you'll be an old half deaf guy too (virtually before you know it)!

So let's assume someone can only hear between 250hz and 2kz. Still gonna tell me it doesnt matter? I mean no offense to you if you are not trolling just trying to elicit a reaction, but I truly do not understand how you do not understand this point.

No offense taken, and no, I am not trolling. I'm offering a different perspective which happens to be my own. I'm not saying that it doesn't matter that our hearing acuity is different from each other. I'm saying that is one of an infinite number of factors at play that might make you and the next person unique and different. I'm saying that another person's ability to hear and discriminate a way that music is reproduced by a system to their own personal liking does not hinge on any one thing, but a whole universe of of diverse factors. Pointing at one of those factors and judging that they are someone who should be ignored or listened to based on that single factor is ludicrous, IMHO (ie he's older than 60 so his opinion probably bears no relation to what a 30 year-old might prefer - in fact they may prefer exactly the same kinds of things). Take the example about the detective you liked that someone came up with (and I agree, it is a good metaphor for some of what is at play here). Make that detective a one-eye'd detective, or one who is otherwise visually impaired and may not see quite as sharply as the next person. I'd still posit that based on his/her experience (we'll assume he/she is a longtime veteran like Columbo - and Peter Falk actually does have a glass eye) he would see more at a crime scene than the average untrained and inexperienced person. Take my previous reference to my longtime audiophile friend who is deaf in one ear - I've listened to many various systems with him over the years, in many locations. I've listened to his comments on those systems and I will tell you for certain that he may not hear soundstage, but his ability to discriminate and facilitate improvements is top notch in my book. We also have somewhat similar, but not identical, musical tastes and I think that does help. So holding someones ability to hear above 15khz, 12khz, or whatever, does not seem like a given qualification for that person giving very valid and astute observations about the way a system sounds. In your example of someone whose hearing was severely impaired I just don't have enough experience with that to comment, other than there are speakers that I've heard with very limited range that are profoundly enjoyable. I suppose I would weigh severe hearing impairment in if it was something I knew about them, just as I might weigh in their preferences in music, sure. As far as the example of the dealers pushing some wire that Douglas mentioned in his post - one could as easily assert that they had an agenda in selling the wires they represented, over other possible choices as well as the one Douglas already owned (which meant no sale to them). Indeed they also could have had hearing impairments and tastes that do not match Douglas's tastes, and also could have been praising the wires based on their use in a different system. I don't know. I'm not sure why one would jump to the conclusion that they had hearing impairment and that was the cause of their preferring the wires they did. Again, so many things at play and all of that is just speculation and really does mean nothing. Ultimately what counts is what you enjoy yourself - I don't think one can elicit a formula for screening reliable candidates to provide you with those answers. The best candidate is you.

Like I said in the original disclaimer I meant no offense to anyone. The title was just to draw attention. Obviously I do not discriminate against the opinions of the "elders" in these forums.. I come here looking for that advice, after all. I have no doubt that experience is much more inportant than ones ability to hear above 14khz. It was just something that o had wondered and thought it would be an interesting discussion. Food for thought.

For me, what most impresses me about a system is imaging and soundstage but I do value the higher frequencies because I can't stand the muffled sound. When I first started looking for speakers I was looking at b&w. What I didn't like about several of their more conventional floor stander designs were that they sounded closed in and boxy to me. What attracted me to the gallo 3.1 which I own currently was the fact that they sounded so open and had a wide range in which the treble does not fall off. At least horizontally anyway.

One of the main reasons I even started the wondering that started this
Topic was my dad. I bought him some high end shure earbuds which I think are amazing for portable playback. He wasn't impressed by them. He didn't think they were any better than the other pair I'd bought him for
home listening which are the Sony 7506. He is not hearing impaired. He loves music. Why can't he hear the difference? That was my thought process. Now I don't want to get in to the models of headphones because that's not the point, but I have te shure e5c headphones and bought my dad the newer shure se530. I could hear the difference between these two and it's in the midrange. The 530 has a much much better midrange to the point I almost bought a pair for myself even though I already have the e5c. The e5c isn't bad but the 530 is amazing by comparison. Why can't he hear this? Granted he isn't impressed by the e5c, and he is just one man. Could be that it's because he doesn't listen as closely as I do but I find that odd because he prefers headphone listening to
Speakers because he says he can hear tiny details on headphones. Anyway that's just what got me thinking down this road we are all on. Thanks for all the responses. Hope no one was too offended because that was not the point and I'm sure I could use all of your help in bettering my system. Even the deaf old guys. :)

** typed on an iPhone so forgive any typos or random capital letters please

Don't get me wrong, Farjamed, you asked a good question and it's prompted an interesting discussion. You have nothing to apologize for and I didn't really see you being offensive to anyone. Certainly no offense taken on my end. As far as your dad and the differences in what you hear, who knows. Just out of curiosity, have both of you actually tested your hearing to see if that is actually something that might be at play, or are you just assuming that because of the difference in your ages. If so, check out this article in the NY Times. And another fluff piece on CBS News here. It's not just older folks who are vulnerable to hearing loss.

I am reminded of a recent audition I was doing of two headphone amps. I have headphones that are a bit challenging to amp well, and certain amps do a better job than others. I was trying two of the amps that are reputed to do a very good job with these particular cans (and indeed they do). I'd made my own assessments of the two amps. Then a good friend who is also a music-lover/audiophile with many years of experience came to visit. He's another person I've shared plenty of listening sessions with in various places and we actually have pretty similar tastes, but are not always right in line with each others preferences. He listened and gave his assessment. He preferred a different amp for different reasons and did not echo many of the ways I was hearing the two. Then a third person came by who was picking up one of the two amps which I was borrowing. He is a headphone buff (honestly I don't know what his experience has been but his musical preferences are in another world from mine). He also listened using his music (as I said, very different from what my friend and I listen to). He had entirely different things to say about the two amps. Who's right? Which amp is better? Should you pay attention to any of the three of our different opinions based upon age...musical preference...experience...a hearing test....or?

Another example...over the years I've had many musicians come by and, usually in passing, hear my system (I never actually invite people to listen unless I know it's an activity they enjoy), whatever form it may take at the time. My wife's family has two musicians and my wife's degree is in music performance. Now a few musicians have stopped and listened in awe and have made some very vivid observations about what they were hearing, but many...no most, just get into the music and basically shrug off any appreciation for how it was being presented. My wife's family all know what's up with my system, but none of them really get it, and their few observations would not at all indicate they are listening from the same standpoint I am, or have the same appreciation of what's going on. I know none of them have the same priorities in assembling a system, and none really care about the same things I do. Who's right? Which approach is "better"? Are they deaf, or is their hearing otherwise impaired? Don't think so, and in many ways, musically they are far more sensitive to some aspects of presentation than I am. Still, they just don't care whether the music is coming out of a boom box or a thoughtfully assembled system that cost as much as a car. Who should you listen to for advice and on the basis of what? It's a valid question you ask about hearing. I don't know that the answer is so simple, except to say that ultimately you're the best judge of what sounds right to you.

BTW, I love the illusion of soundstage (with a 2-channel speaker system) as well, so we're on the same page there. There are plenty of folks who feel it's way overrated, but it does thrill me.

ok, have fun, kids.

Hey, who you callin' a kid?! I turn 51 on Friday my friend. Over half a century of valuable experiences up for grabs...what a valuable resource...get it while you still can. This is a limited time offer. In a few more years I'll be partially deaf and poppin' pills to raise the family flag. I'll have to turn in my Audiophile Decoder Ring and ID badge. Between the pension from Audiogon and selling off the system to some young buck who can better appreciate it, I'll have enough to buy me a Bose Wave, a years supply of Depends™, and a hearing aid. Maybe the government will have implemented the Soylent Green program by then and I'll have that to look forward to instead.

Well, you may not be a kid, Jax2, but you're a bunch younger than my son. BTW, I just bought a new cart and a spare armtube for my JMW 10.5i arm today.

Farjamed, my observation/comment was not meant to offend. I don't know you, and I respect however you choose to participate in discussions on Agon. However, I will say that my experience is that, IN GENERAL, participants who seldom discuss music tend to also be ones who rely on specs, and are prone to want to declare this component as "the best", or "better than that one", without focusing more on aspects of sound reproduction that are more elusive, and harder to quantify.

Wether a component makes sound that resembles music or not has much more to do than with technical accuracy in the high frequencies. So, the ability of a person to accurately hear in the upper frequencies is only but one of many aspects of judging sound that matter. It is also interesting to me that while even the most open-minded audiophiles, who acknowledge that measurements don't tell the whole story, seldom acknowledge the limitations of the equipment doing the measuring. IOW, I am not willing to concede that because some piece of electronic equipment tells my audiologist that I can't hear anything above 14K (not the case), that my ear/brain are not processing that information at least to a degree that it is still relevant. Case in point: the 20hz-20k hz standard. It became the standard on "determination" that humans could not hear anything above 20k hz. It is now generally acknowledged that the standard is very inadequate, and that humans can, in fact, process information well above 20k hz; and that the presence, or absence, of such has a profound effect on the perception of information much lower in frequency. The brain also has a tremendous ability to fill in the blanks.

There is a lot about this stuff that we don't fully understand. And to a degree, I like it that way. I think that focusing too much on the technical detracts from the ability to put together a system that makes music; at least MY idea of what music should sound like.

You state that your Dad loves music, and that you can't understand why he can't hear the difference between two sets of earbuds. I suspect that it is not so much that he can't hear the difference, but that he just doesn't care; and that the act of trying to determine which one "sounds" better, detracts from his experience of listening to the music.

As a general observation, hearing acuity does diminish over the years. In consequence, a twenty year old with "normal" hearing for his age group will hear more of what a good audio system has to offer than an eighty year old with "normal" hearing for his age group. The eighty year old, however, can still hear significant differences in equipment. Senior citizens can still obtain useful guidance from good audio reviews. And they are well advised to try components in their own systems when possible. In brief, they can still be audiophiles at their advanced age.

What does this mean? I am not old and I have my hearing, but I am offened for the older people. I saw a program where a 76 year old guy made it to the top of Everest. What's so special about an audiophile? What's the thinking here, that when you're older, you can't do anything, just waiting around to die? Aren't there young people that have hearing loss? Aren't there musicians that have hearing loss and still play? I consider my self an audiophile, but some of these posts are creepy. An audiophile is probably way at the bottom of the list as a way to identify who I am.

I shall remain an audiophile through deafness and death.

Long live Audiogon,

I'm too old for practically everything...so what!

Good listening,
Larry

Farjamed

These are quotes that continue to bother me about your thread.

"One of the things about audiophiles I've always wondered is how they reconcile their age, and the scientific fact that their hearing isn't what it used to be, with their belief they can can hear all the nuances of high end gear, and even the cables."

"@Jax2 The point is that people read reviews of equipment, they come on to Audiogon and ask people's opinions of gear.. People/Reviewers respond in such detail about how certain speakers, amps, preamps, cables, etc sound to them. How accurate or useful can this information be if their hearing is compromised."

"This actually goes to something much deeper.

Taken from wikipedia "Audiophile":
Criticisms usually focus on claims around so-called "tweaks" and accessories beyond the core source, amplification, and speaker products. Examples of these accessories include speaker cables, component interconnects, stones, cones, CD markers, and power cables or conditioners.[15] Manufacturers of these products often make strong claims of actual improvement in sound but do not offer any measurements or testable claims. This absence of measurable (rather than subjective) improvement, coupled with sometimes high prices, raises questions about the truthfulness of the marketing.[16]
Roger Russell – a former engineer and speaker designer for McIntosh Labs – describes the introduction of expensive speaker wire brands, and critiques their performance in his online essay called Speaker Wire - A History. He writes, "The industry has now reached the point where [wire] resistance and listening quality are not the issues any more, although listening claims may still be made....The strategy in selling these products is, in part, to appeal to those who are looking to impress others with something unique and expensive."[16]
Skeptic James Randi, through his foundation, has offered a prize of $1 million to anyone who can demonstrate that $7,250 audio cables "are any better than ordinary audio cables".[17] In 2008, audio reviewer Michael Fremer attempted to claim the prize, and said that Randi declined the challenge.[18] Randi said that the cable manufacturer Pearl was the one who withdrew.[19]"


"I would like to know if I am taking advice from a buncha deaf old guys with different priorities because of physical limitations."

"DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be offensive in anyway..."

Huh?

Never to old Hello.

I'm young enough to still know everything!

This hobby, to most here, is not about sound or hearing or music. It's about gadgets and twinkering and appriciateing well made and visualy pleasing equipment.

sorry for the spelling on the previous post hit submit instead of preview.

Isocronism

Perfect!!!!

Isochronism!!! Sorry!!

Maybe your to young to be a AUDIOPHILE!!

Speak up sonny!

Well, John "Cougar" Mellencamp said life goes on, even after the thrill of livin' is gone. So you know, when you get older, a lot of the pleasures associated with being young aren't quite feasible, but lust for music can be indulged indefinitely.

And besides, when you're older, what better use is there for your money that audio gear. Travel? The only travel that would make me happy is time-travel (backwards about 20+ years).

better than a low quality system, and as long as you can appreciate that difference, you can enjoy being an audiophile.

I have a buddy that is 55 and had hearing loss due to being exposed to a loud noise in a confined space. He has to wear a hearing aid, and has had quite a bit of trouble with his hearing. He knows I'm an audiophile, but assumed he could no longer appreciate a good stereo so he didn't pay much attention to it, nor did he express any interest in hearing my system.

Then a friend asked for his help in picking out a stereo system for her husband. He went to a couple high-end stores and got all excited because even though he couldn't hear all the frequencies like he could before his hearing loss, he could still appreciate the difference between the various systems he previewed. In fact, he called me up to discuss the whole subject with the enthusiasm of someone that just made a great discovery. I think he might now buy a stereo of his own.

So I guess it's all relative. It may make no sense for him to buy a system like mine, but he now knows that he can hear that a cheap system sounds cheap and a better system sounds better. The main thing is to get people to enjoy their music at in whatever way they can.

And just to reinforce a point made by others, there's a big difference between hearing and listening. About 10 years go, an audiophile friend of mine taught me how to listen. I was shocked at how much I was missing until he pointed it out to me while doing some A/B comparisons of equipment. So while it's true that some people are just incapable of hearing certain frequencies of music, it's far more common that people with good hearing miss just as much because they don't know how to listen.

Maybe the question should be "Are you to young to be an audiophile"?

When you attend a hi-fi show all you see are middle aged balding white guys who are 15+ pounds overweight. And this includes me!

Farjamed,
\
I'm glad you brought this up. Hearing is not necessarily age related. It's the mileage that matters. One scientists compared 80 year olds in Africa to 18 year ols in America. The old Africans, who did not employ modern technology, had better hearing.

Did you know that a hammer hitting a nail is within one Db of a chainsaw, and that the hammer is more damaging to hearing because the chainsaw produces constant noise? Always use hearing protection while fixing the house. Always wear hearing protection at stadium concerts. Never play those ratty MP3's loud enough for the whole bus to hear. When you get old, barring illness, your hearing will be great.

Hammy