I think the term audiophile is a bit misleading as the person who enjoys listening to music will listen to an audio vel sound = performed music, and the gear lover will listen to the audio vel sound = performed and recorded music. Both seems to be very close to each other, aren't they?
In my view, very often the audiophile tend to fall in love with the gear (equipment) and many do not care about music performance any more. So maybe this should be called: gear lover or audio-tech-phile?
Yes, that's not about all of audiophiles as they're many dedicated music lovers and listeners. Enjoy Your listening... to music as well!
The Politically Correct answer will be cost is irrelevant. Now, the Real World rephrasing of the question is What is the minimum that can be spent to have a truly quality system? I have heard some powered speakers for about $2K that were excellent, containing amplification, DAC, and streamer. Add a phone and you are done. If I ever get a second home, this is how I will go
while Audiophile seems to technically have a formal dictionary definition, we clearly are all defining it differently, so this thread going in many directions...but generally fun...
Because he had learn how to learn hearing better ...
Is it elitist ?
It is as being not deaf is BETTER state in a general way compared to a deaf people...
We can listen very well classical music on a phone, music is not sound, but sound can be music , then any musician, even those who dare not to play the audiophile game know the difference between different violins quality levels, Stradivarius, Guarneri and 500 bucks instruments ...
We live an era with no education at all given ,( because it was deemed not necessary for a slave worker especially a voting one , save if he pay a lot more than he can to afford it , guess why ?) where we brag about staying ignorant , and where we had learn how to despise any "elite" on any form even biological ...
Sorry, elite exist in all aspects of life and for all activities and studies; woman are elite by design and man too, not by choices save for conditioned fools...... The rest is studying and practising...
There is no point in being a non elite baker .... Will you pay for his bread ?
“Tolerance will reach such a level that intelligent people will be forbidden to think so as not to offend fools” Fyodor Dostoyevsky
I think we’ve gotten some "hits" and "misses" here. Mostly "hits."
Being an "audiophile" can worn as a badge of honor. It depends on how we use it. Yes, we can weaponize our "audiophile status" to belittle others and position ourselves in a position of superiority. Or, we can be a humble servant -- worthwhle asset in helping to deliveri the best musical experiences for others. Perhaps, turn them on to some great music in the process? Our inner audiophile makes ours, and other’s lives better -- on many levels.
Somewhere along the way, our experiences have navigated us towards the pursuit of better sound. The "price of admission" the to obtain the goals of better sound required an intellectual journey, an investment in time and, yes, resources. It is the pursuit that defines us, not what is sittling in/on the rack at home. As mentioned earlier, I believe the "audiophile system" is that system that best fulfills the objectives of the listener after following something resembling an "audiophile path." IF that system is budget/space constrained, so be it. The fact that we took the "audiophile path" -- research, listening, peer review etc. to make those choices is what defines us. And, makes it "an audiphile system."
This process also leads us to an understanding of a component/system’s limitations and we make it a point to do so. There have been several posts here by those stating they went to Big Box and bought a <insert popular brand name consumer product> and "LOVE IT." Well, this may be the case. But, if we haven’t taken the time to evaluate other components at, near, or even multiples of price point above that, we don’t know it’s limitations. The "audiophile path" is missing, therefore, its is a "one and done consumer choice" and not a carefully selected product based on it’s performance vs the rest of the world, as a true "audiophile" would have done. I am familiar with many of the items listed here, and can politely state that there’s a lof of music that never leaves those boxes -- compared to other choices in the category.
My pet peeve is when one obsesses over the law of diminishing returns. IMO this does not exist if one considers themselves an Audiophile. Where did this simple minded formula come to fruition... $20k amp must sound 10x better than a $2k amp? How could this even be measured(lol)? The $20k amp could be capable of hundreds of sonics improvements over the $2k amp. IMO the $20k amp is the bargain.
A person that is may never happy with the sound they have and has to have the latest design. Of course that does not mean they do not love music it just mean they can't completely enjoy what the have.
I believe if you call yourself an Audiophile, you are, just the real desire to be such, makes it so. I am an audiophile, and have been since 1964, I took apart my parents console and built boxes for the speakers, hung them over my headboard, and ran speaker wires from the back of the console to the speakers, laid in bed and played records.....I was an audiophile.
Elac Debut Reference Floorstanders from Andrew Jones - $1400
Rythmik L12 Subwoofer - $629
Yamaha A-S701 integrated amp - $800
Schiit Modi Multibit DAC - $300
Sum Total = 3129 USD ----> The fidelity and musicality of this setup is bonafide audiophilia. For a "music first" audiophile (not a gearhead, not a brand name snob, not a dude in pursuit of audio jewelry or elusiveness, etc), this could be end game.
20 years ago, he would have had to spend magnitudes more for this quality of sound. The above mentioned ballpark would be the price of admission.
The AKG K340 was uncontested flagship headphone put against the best Stax at the times and today...
Cost used for me : 100 bucks...
They contain two new technology never used together again... Kennerton representative said to me when i ask the question , that to recreate these with today standards it will cost too much in research...They are not interested to recreate an hybrid...None of my 9 other headphones beat the K340 because all gave an unnatural sound even the two low cost Stax i owned...I throw them out of my music system...It takes me 6 months of experiments to modify the K340 and optimize them...They are old(45 years old ) they needed it... Their soundfield is natural timbre and speaker-like and they gave me the original recording acoustic to hear...Not bad for 100 bucks...
My amplifier is a Sansui alpha: cost used 300 bucks...It is the top of Sansui history in amplification ...
It is so good i returned my upgrade purchase of a Berning tube amplifier after one hour of listening ...The synergy of the Sansui with the K340 was too good... No comparison...I dont criticize the Berning amp here, i underline the necessary synergy...
Is the Sansui alpha no more high end amplifier ? Yes it is not a low fi product even for today...
Synergy matter sorry in a high end system not only the design ...
Add to that my contemporary dac , a low cost one WITH NO APPARENT lacks in any way.... Cost 200 bucks...Hidizs AP 80 pro...
I consider my audio system high end....total cost near 700 bucks... 😁
i will add my nearfield modified active speakers in their acoustic small room paid 100 bucks 12 years ago, M-Audio AV 40.. I use them for music ONLY after 6 modifications/optimization... Not BEFORE...They reach 50 hertz now instead of the 85 hertz in the specs sheet... I add 17 tubes bundle of straws of different volume and lenght to the porthole... ( many speakers are Hemholtz resonator ) I increase the directivity of the tweeter with a cylinder for my near field listening... And i mechanically decrease the crosstalk level... It is NO MORE the speakers they were in their original box... I put them in a special acoustic corner with diffuser, absorption and reflective surface ratio...
An audiophile must learn acoustic and how to embed gear... This had nothing to do with price tag....
My goal is and was the best system in the world for peanuts price...
I will bragg then about basic knowledge and creativity not about my wallet... 😊
Beware: Right out of the box with no optimization , no modification , no acoustic control, i dont like my system and it is not high end...Now it is....
Acoustics knowledge rule the gear not the reverse...
@hilde45That's how much I spent on dinner with my daughter and her husband last night, well close.. I go off cheap!😎 Was some really good Korean BBQ with K-Pop blaring in the background.
On the other hand there are audiophile components. These are built to exacting requirements where component costs are unimportant… sound quality is the only objective.
So, if one is really to adhere by the boldfaced part, the components involved could, strictly speaking, be either cheaper or more expensive, right? And yet you continue with..
These tend to start around $10K to $20K. So every aspect is optimized… the best… not cheapest subcomponents are used.
If sound quality truly is the only objective, then why is it automatically assumed price always has a strict bearing? To your logic then price is the only objective, to which sound quality must follow by necessity. I mean, which is it?
If sound quality really is where you're coming from (and your specific position on what constitutes good sound quality likely isn't shared by everyone) I would imagine the outcome is somewhat more varied in price range, segment, brand, principle, design and what not than what you would propose or imply.
So, budding audiophiles seek out off brands, used audiophile equipment and off beat techniques to get the best sound they can.
So, the man of freshly produced audiophile gear, widely known brands and "on beat" techniques is at odds with, or really throws a slightly condescending glance at the individuals who'd choose used (and in effect cheaper) "off brand" gear and "off techniques" (compared to what, one might add), as someone aspiring to be a true, seasoned audiophile. I fail to see the relevance of what you write with anything that's a true bearing on an individual's pursuit, goals and actual achievements in regards to audio reproduction - regardless of price and approach - other than telling me more about you.
@deep_333 If your current system is your final audio destination kudos. What is offensive is claiming anyone that has or desires an audio system of better build and sound quality cares less about music and more about gear? That might get the award for "most convoluted" statement on Audiogon!
Everybody knows that my 700 bucks system cannot rival many more expansive one we can see in the virtual system pages as a real or potential better audiophile experience 😁...
This is a common place indisputable fact ...I dont brag about any system myself including mine , i invite people to STUDY AND EXPERIMENT instead or before upgrading ...
What many people ignore is that we can have an audiophile experience at low cost ANYWAY, provide we know or learn how to create synergy and know or learn how to control mechanical, electrical and acoustical embeddings of any audio system ...
Claiming otherwise is reinforcing the false belief that the relation between good sound and a better sound is depending on the gear mainly and more depending especially only on the gear price...
This is double falsehood : Synergy and the acoustics/psycho-acoustics knowledge and not only room acoustic here, is the basis of audiophile experience not merely the gear design , and more than that there is no linear relation between audiophile experience value and gear price ...
Now if someone read my post as meaning that i deny the audio quality value of high end designed component compared to low cost solutions , he misread my post COMPLETELY... I say that acoustic and other basic knowledge are more valuable than gear price and as much as important to create and reach the MINIMAL ACOUSTIC SATISFACTION THRESHOLD ...When we cross this threshold music became so immersive we forgot upgrades, most of us at least , save the obsessive compulsive consumers who anyway focus on gear price scale upgrade not on knowledge or acoustic experiments... ...
I did not rebuild the headphone ... It was a very good design to begin with... I changed the inner shell chamber by extracting the thick grid that was there for protection not sound quality.... I put anti vibration product inside, 2 complementary one, sorbothane duro 70 and Fo.Q tape from japan ... I chose the right pads on five possible choices i bought at low cost in China because the volume of the shell chamber matter then the thickness of the pad matter a lot and i pick a perforated pad for better results ... I used the right equalization to be nearer the Harman curve ... I picked the right amplifier , after trying two others the second more cleaner among the three but the more powerful because this K340 are picky to drive ...I used a dac more on the analysing side deliberately because this headphone is very organic and need very clean source...i used also my homemade protecting EMI plate ( shungite+copper tape ) all along beside my components ... Etc...
Without all this my headphone is not at all the same... Now it beat anything i heard in headphones...
This is only simple experiments... It takes me 6 months to reach the end... It was fun and low cost...
Do you prefer to buy a 5,000 bucks headphone which i even doubt will beat my 100 bucks K340 on ALL acoustic counts because anyway by design he is one of its kind and prove that very old design can be irreplaceable even today ?
Learning is fun it takes only thinking and experimenting...But you are right it is costly in time and i am retired...
I call that optimization ...
It is trying that or throwing money on the gear ...
I prefer to motivate creativity here than claiming that costly upgrade are the only one solution as most think anyway erroneously ... The minimal acoustic satisfaction threshold dont ask for 100,000 bucks of gear ...
Please understand that i spoke this way to motivate people and push them to study a bit before making useless half the time big expanse...
@mahgister While I applaud your attitude and your ability to dive deep into the world of tinkering to achieve results where the end product is greater than the sum of it’s parts, there’s one big fly in the ointment with many of your posts. The word ability. Pretty sure I’m not the only life long music lover who has never acquired the knowledge or experience to do what you do. And once again, I applaud you for being able to walk down that road. For those like me who have no option but to open our wallets when we want to get a better result..........
Now if you want me to crib and pour a foundation, frame a house, wire and plumb it, or maybe you need some beautiful furniture, then I’m your man. But rebuild a vintage set of headphones? I just don’t speak that language.
@deep_333 If your current system is your final audio destination kudos. What is offensive is claiming anyone that has or desires an audio system of better build and sound quality cares less about music and more about gear? That might get the award for "most convoluted" statement on Audiogon!
@dayglow , No clue what you are talking about (the "convolution" could be in your head)..My Stereo rig runs between 100 to 150k depending on what I throw in it. My multichannel rig might be around 20 to 30k, ~50 to 60k if treatments are included.
The gateway drug/affordable/bona-fide audiophilia rig I posted above I what my daughter currently runs in her apartment.
If high end audio died with my generation (avg age: 50 to 70), it may have a lot to do with the type of "personalities" that hang out in hifi forums.
Unfortunately, money spent does not make one an audiophile. A bit myopic, the audio passionate desire to pursue better sound reproduction, that could be a free tweak or a $30k upgrade.
"My pet peeve is when one obsesses over the law of diminishing returns. "
I think the key question is: "Did I get my money’s worth?"
Let’s say, for a moment, that the universe inserts a rule where significant differences in quality happen at around 2x the price. A use this "rule" using audio as a basis, where 3db is a significant increase in perceived loudness. This 3db increase also requires 2x the power (or, number of speakers) to obtain this goal. Applying this ’rule", to get a significan increase in SQ from, say, a $300 speaker, we’ll need to be at $600. All is going well enough in this scenario until, we reach serious money. A $30k speaker now requires a $60k investment (and, bank loan?) to obtain.
You might find this rule "silly" and can think of (valid) examples of why this isn’t true. But, the point being, when you start throwing big dollars at an audio system, the upgrades can be quite expensive. And, yes, worth every penny.
Let’s say, for a moment, that the universe inserts a rule where significant differences in quality happen at around 2x the price. A use this "rule" using audio as a basis, where 3db is a significant increase in perceived loudness. This 3db increase also requires 2x the power (or, number of speakers) to obtain this goal. Applying this ’rule", to get a significan increase in SQ from, say, a $300 speaker, we’ll need to be at $600. All is going well enough in this scenario until, we reach serious money. A $30k speaker now requires a $60k investment (and, bank loan?) to obtain.
You might find this rule "silly" and can think of (valid) examples of why this isn’t true. But, the point being, when you start throwing big dollars at an audio system, the upgrades can be quite expensive. And, yes, worth every penny.
The problem is that the way you present the diminishing returns observation ( it is not really a law) you present it as a MERE objective computation... But this "law" is related not only to objective design improvement with time but also to the subjective status of the customer who must be ready and knowleadgeable enough to perceive the change and accept it... This border separating objective design improvement and the listener status imply at the frontier near this border a MINIMUM ACOUSTIC SATISFACTION THRESHOLD or M.A.S.T. related to each acoustic factors to be objectively improved and to be subjectively perceived as such...
The M.A.S.T. is different for each of us not only in subjective value but in his objective perception ... Acoustic factors for their determination and evaluation are related not only to our history in audio, in our audition personal learning and history, in our musical education , they are related to technical gear design imptovement but also to many embeddings controls in the mechanical, electrical and especially room acoustical dimensions and also to psycho-acoustics basic knowledge ...
Then to understand how work the diminishing return "law" we must be able to perceive the M.A.S.T. and learn how to CONTROL IT AT WILL and not only go with upgrades spree... ....Because half the times at least, upgrades are meaningless, void of any oriented acoustic improvement and induced by marketing...In the opposite learning how to know ourself and our auditory history by learning acoustics basic concepts ( no it is more than room acoustic here ) and experimenting with low cost mechanical , electrical and acoustical experiments and simple devices, will make us able to know how to stop upgrading without being frustrated by the soundfield qualities.... We will had learn how to reach the minimal acoustic satisfaction threshold but minimizing our money expanse ...
Each acoustic factors are related for each system room /ears/brain ...This relation is in some orders because each factors are directly or indirectly related, then we must learn what to do to improve the most important one and to which level because too much may be a defect... This is why the Diminishing returns relation between the subjective perception of an improvement and the objective design improvement cannot make sense without the minimal acoustic satisfaction threshold for each acoustic factors separetely and together in a balance way...
This is why my motto in audio is :
Never upgrade anything BEFORE embedding all components rightfully in the three working dimensions...
And psycho-acoustics science rule the gear component working first and last not the reverse...
Then opposing "music lover" to audiophile as the one ready and obsessed by sound quality to the point of throwing money without ever stopping , make no sense... This opposition is preposterous and meaningless... Learning is the rule not expanse... We must be music and acoustic lover not only gear focus lover...
Another forgotten important point is that there is no relation between the state of a system well embedded in his working dimensions before and after... No comparison at all ... Not knowing how to embed a system nor even knowing that a system must be embedded rightfully to be evaluated, most people had no other solution than buying costlier cables and costlier components to feel less frustrated...
It's a made up term. It is simply people who enjoy listening to music where the equipment is an important part of the experience that hopefully improves their enjoyment of it, but for some, it's a never ending chase to improve that end and that end is never satiated. For some, it's a fun hobby, they get real enjoyment from trying, and using different equipment. You can love music and not be an audiophile, or someone who has an audio system built around a pair of $100,000 speakers may simply want something nice and has never heard of Stereophile, HiFi News, or even Audiogon or Care. His passion might be cars or art or anything. I have one acquaintance whose system is so over the top, stuff that I have never seen or heard of b-4 meeting him, never reads the journals. He just likes what he likes. Another who owns JBL Paragons supported by, Jadis, Futterman OTL's, and Marantz Nines really doesn't know much about the stuff he owns and learned about them from visits to Japan of all places.
@jacobsdad2000I think one of the qualifications is that you are a man, I don't know any women that fall prey to this addictive habit/hobby of ours. Maybe transgenders do but I don't know of any.
@jacobsdad2000Sorry and I don't mean anthing bad about anbody and at this site I have never noticed (and not saying there isn't) any obvious females talking about audio gear. But I do suspect behind every audiophile that is married or lives with a women will get the LOOK 🙄when spending money on thier Audio System.
By education and tradition but also by physical genetical and biochimical design woman are tailor made and conditioned to passionnately mind about children and their male possible consorts and men are designed and conditioned also to be occupied by objects which may help dominate and help the tribes survival ... We have all in each man a feminine part of the soul and vice versa in the case of woman for sure...This is a balance between these two genetic but also symbolic forms in each of us ...
But in general woman loving music are not focussed so much on gear variation as men with similar interest ...And in general man loving sound are not so much focussed also on music for its own sake as much as woman with the same inclination ..
Ideologies opposing these simple general facts are just that, ideologies...
Of course, it’s almost always only men. What do you think we want to hear while listening to our beloved stereos ? And who do you think it should come from ?
It is not how much one spends, but rather, how important is good sound and how much effort one puts into pursuing that sound. I have a young friend who has not put in nearly as much money as I have, but, in his relatively shorter time as an audiophile, he has put in way more effort. He finds stuff at junk and estate sales and does repairs/refurbishment. He hunts down some quite odd items, like rare Japanese speaker drivers, to make various speakers. Some of his junk finds are almost unbelievable--like a Garrard 301 turntable that was in a stereo cabinet where the whole works was purchased for $50. He use to work for a local stereo shop from the time he was 17 to just a few months ago when he took a tech job at a test instrument company. While at that shop he was involved in the installation of a system north of $1.5 million in another country. THIS is WAY more than I've ever done, and I am pretty dedicated to audio pursuits.
@grh1958You are all good man. Just had Dylan Mulvany delivering my free Bud Light. 🤣 and she/he asked what an Audiophile was. Though I do know a couple of ladies that enjoy our hobby, I go 4 wheeling with them.
@jacobsdad2000 Sorry and I don't mean anthing bad about anbody and at this site I have never noticed (and not saying there isn't) any obvious females talking about audio gear. But I do suspect behind every audiophile that is married or lives with a women will get the LOOK 🙄when spending money on thier Audio System.
@jacobsdad2000 Sorry and I don’t mean anthing bad about anbody and at this site I have never noticed (and not saying there isn’t) any obvious females talking about audio gear. But I do suspect behind every audiophile that is married or lives with a women will get the LOOK 🙄when spending money on thier Audio System.
There are plenty of women who spend a considerable amount of cash (atleast up in the 5k ballpark) and have rigs that sound very good. At that point, they are satisfied and tend to focus more on the music, discovering new artists, growing their music collection, etc, which is the whole point of great sounding gear in the first place. In other words, they seem to be more of the "music first" audiophile...
It’s the "dude" who thinks that a 15k cable will fix all his setup errors and his lousy room, i.e. continues to spend up the dum-deedee tree. Blame the cable for everything in the end!! 😁 It’s the "dude" who generally sits around with a 300k rig that still sounds like sht in spite of all the glitter in his room....living in a state of constant disgruntlement.
We will call prime meaningful sounds, natural sounds, music or speech...
Guess who by design must be sensible to ANY sound detection for reason of care and protection and for a best socialization of his offsprings ?
Female hearing is more sensible to high frequencies recognition for this reason ...
Then they listen music and are less prone to go for marketing gear fetichism a disease among audiophiles who ignore any acoustics basic embeddings and anything which is not gear bragging ... I exagerate to spell my point but that is my observation in all audio threads...And who call me "tin foil hat" because of a low cost tweak ? Grown men hypnotized by marketing and obsessive about price tag , oblivious of any mechanical,electrical and acoustical embeddings and about psycho-acoutics, obsessed by possible costly upgrades ... 😊
@jacobsdad2000Just had Dylan Mulvany delivering my free Bud Light. 🤣 and she/he asked what an Audiophile was. Bud light comes in real handy when you need target practice. 🎯
@deep_333I do think guys are more motivated toward the gear aspect of audio. However with steaming available I listen more than I ever had. Back in the 1990's I built a system modeled after Cory Greenberg's (stereophile) poormans hi end rig and it seemed no matter how many cd's I bought I never seem to have enough to listen to that wasn't tired. So here I am 30yrs later just loving the endless amount of songs through streaming and with a better rig. But my live in girlfriend thinks I should spend more on our house which I admit is more practicle. She will always mention it if there is a song playing that she likes but will never mention how good it sounds through my system.
You start with the room 1st. I built a room within a room in a custom house and the room plus treatments were $60,000, before spending 1 dime on electronics. When you are designing a custom home with a custom audio room, it’s cheaper to do things in the beginning than to retrofit it. I have friends that spent more than that on their rooms.
As for equipment, money spent does matter. Everything in the audio stream matters: the microphones, the cables for the mics, the artists amps/guitars/piano, mixers, the recorders, just before it gets recorded on the medium. Engineers do not use $200 pioneer reel to reels to record a song.
I don’t think it matters if you like music or you like the equipment, if you just like the music, get you a pair of beats headphones and call it a day. If you want the best sound quality possible, then it’s going to cost you. $500 speakers modified to the hilt will still sound like $500 speakers, same goes for amps/dacs/etc
We did an article based on a quote that I heard at AXPONA this year from an industry executive who said "Anybody with a pair of earbuds can be an audiophile".
Then: ARC SP-11, D-250 servo, Acoustat 2+2 med, full blown Linn and quite a few high priced peripheral equipment. Total then about $40g Can.
Now: Marantz 1040, Mission speakers, Technics 1400 Mk2, Shure M97x. All used except cartridge. Total: $750 Can. including NAD cd and old iPhone. It sounds great!
After 35 years or so I just lost interest in the “hobby” and in the endless spending. But not in the music.
Still an Audiophile … Don’t need extravagant set ups to enjoy music.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
