Audiophiles, Music, and Equipment: Can We Be Both "Conservative" AND "Progressive"?


The terms “conservative” and “progressive” can be highly differentiating, polarizing, and clearly segmenting among those who identify as one, or the other. As audiophiles, can we sit back for a moment, take a look inward and ask ourselves the question: “Can we be a little bit of both?”

We’ll start with the premise that the “audiophile” is a music lover, high fidelity equipment connoisseur and generally good person. Great works have been around for centuries. We’ve seen various arrangements, variations, covers, remastering, artistic interpretations, etc. of the original work. We may enjoy the updated versions of the work with instrumentation or technology that was not available at the time. A recent topic on this forum mentioned that an enduring classical piece written for solo piano is most recognized as a full orchestral rendition -- Pictures at an Exhibition. Sometimes the “cover” is more commercially successful than the original writer/songwriter version and, in many cases, a vast improvement of the work. As much as we may welcome, or even prefer, the newer form(s) of the work, something anchors our hearts and souls to the original. We believe that it should be around forever. “Conserving” the piece as the artist intended not only supports and archives accurate music history but allows us to enjoy and fully acknowledge of the genius of who created it. The concepts of “Leave the original intact”, we might say (conserve) and “Allow others to apply their unique talents to create something special” (progressive) may actually coexist in the music world.

The equipment we’ve fondly tinkered with for decades may follow a similar trajectory. We all remember the pieces that just blew us away and began a life-long journey in pursuit of better sound. Numerous principles guiding "better sound" from the past are still relevant today, continually assessed by engineers and audiophiles worldwide. We also remember those moments when “the newest thing” failed to meet expectations. And those times when our patience paid off and those breakthrough technologies finally matured and earned a distinguished place in our audio racks – possibility pushing aside tenured and reliable pieces. “It’s time to move on” appears quite frequently on this forum and rings true for many participants. Others want to “hang on to what they got” for a variety of reasons: financial, emotional, physical, logistics, etc. Or, in their view, the gear may still be performing at its peak and can sonically compete quite well on the open market today. So, there is no strong motivation to change. Yet, there’s this desire to be “progressive”-- not marooned in an audio sense, left by themselves on an island of obsolete ideas and outdated equipment. This dichotomy reveals a synergy among active audiophiles—a desire to maintain what is familiar, competent, and operational while embracing the urge for progress. More often than not, we’ll see a hybrid of both “old school” and “cutting edge” in the same system – perhaps even inside the same chassis.

The conventional tug-of-war between conservative and progressive ideologies might not entirely encapsulate the audiophile community as it relates to music and the equipment designed to reproduce it. We are grown up enough to acknowledge both, and there is more than one “right” answer to a problem.

 

 

128x128waytoomuchstuff

Showing 3 responses by mahgister

I hate binary classification which so appeal to the narrow part of our working lazy minds...

Audio is grounded and based on acoustics which include room acoustic and psycho-acoustics , not on the gear specs ideal space of the user manual and on their price tag and not on their date of creation linearly classed from outdated to up to date, but exist in a controlled or uncontrolled ROOM with synergy with other components for specific HRTF and inner ear/brain measures ...

The sound experience dont come from the dac/amp/ speakers as separate entities in no room for any ears/brain ...

This general false impression, which is NOT EVEN WRONG as all half truths , come from the marketing conditioning to sell the newest miraculous component as THE SOLUTION , not acoustics science and experience which set of ideas they cannot sell anyway and which implies not money but an amount of invested time to study and experiment ...

 

He typically sits around claiming that some garbage tech from 60, 70 years ago is the best there is and shall be "conserved".

By the way i failed to upgrade the headphone out of my vintage Sansui alpha 607i of 35 years old with one of the best tube amplifier in the world 2 months ago ... Then some vintage piece own the right to be loved and conserved for the sake of the S.Q. /cost ratio factor...This dont means that i am conservative mind... It means i know how to use my components and make them shine at their optimal working thanks to the method of mechanical,electrical and acoustical embeddings...

And my 45 years old hybrid  headphone , the AKG K340 trash anything i ever listened to ...My 9 others headphones , dynamic, magneplanar or electrostatic included ... Not bad for 100 bucks... It takes me 6 months working with them to optimize them ...

Dont call me "conservative" , call this acoustic common sense ...

 

Acoustics is the sleeping princess waiting for the brain/prince kiss to awake and commend the seven working dwarves ( the gear) ...

 

No further comment....

Many thread are born from ignorance about acoustics, which is not mere room acoustic, but the ground for all sound concept and experience ...

This basic acoustic knowledge which is mot mere room acoustic help us to understand  how  define the gear experience in a more specific context : specific ears/brain and specific room ...

Applying political concepts on top of that make no sense ...

And even taken in a psychological way this make no sense either ...Sound experience has nothing to do with "conservatism" or "progress" with the gear design, in isolation of other piece of gear (synergy ) or without any embeddings controls mechanically and electrically , and out of any specific room , and out of  any measured ears /brain specific HTRF and inner ears structure which makes of each of us a unique listener in his own way ...

We can use vintage which are good or very costlier new product, it is a non psychological or non  political decision ; but more a decision based on various factors : as money, audio knowledge and acoustic knowledge and some others secondary factors ...😊

Here i must apologize to the OP , nothing personal in my post , and more than that because i like discussion i thank him ..

My best to him ... And to all ...