Do you agree with John Atkinson (and me)?


 

Point 1: In the recent thread entitled ’How much is too much to spend on a system?’, I contributed this comment: "The hi-fi shouldn’t be worth more than one’s music library." I said that half-jokingly, a wisecrack that I knew might be disagreed with.

Point 2: In the 1990’s I became a regular customer at the Tower Records Classical Music Annex store in Sherman Oaks, California. The store manager knew a LOT about Classical music, but also made no secret of his distain for audiophiles, whom he viewed as caring more about the sound quality of recordings than their musical quality.

Point 3: In the early days of The Absolute Sound magazine, the writers occasionally mocked audiophiles who had a serious high end system, but whose record collections merely consisted of a small number of "demo" discs. Those audiophiles collect records that make their systems sound good, rather than assemble a system that makes their records sound good.

 

I make the above points as a preamble to the following:

In the past few months I have fallen behind in my reading of the monthly issues of Stereophile that arrive in my mailbox. Yesterday I finally got around to reading the editorial in the January issue, written by John Atkinson (filling in for current editor Jim Austin, who is recuperating from surgery, I believe). The final two paragraphs of the editorial read as follows:

 

"Back in the day, I did an analysis of Stereophile reviewers’ systems. The common factor was that all the reviewers’ collections of LPs and CDs cost a lot more than their systems. The same is true of me, even in these days of streaming."

"Isn’t that the way it should be for all music-loving audiophiles?"

 

Well, is it?

 

128x128bdp24

No, I do not agree.

The expenditures are both independent variables, subject to uncorrelated pricing structures.

I am tempted to sneer at your Tower Records store manager who I assume is listening to the garbage put out by a poor man's shitty low fi sound system.

And the TAS writers who mocked owners of high end systems seem completely out of touch with audiophiles like me who simply enjoy having good equipment.  (And whose purchases are important to their jobs.)

 

Some of the most rabid audiophiles also own very large record collections. Michael Fremer has a quite nice system and a massive music library. But my gawd, what a mess of a listening room!

@jwei: When I heard a really good system for the first time (Decca pickup, ARC electronics, ESL loudspeakers), I found the sound being produced to be thrilling in and of itself, like live music. No shame in that. And hearing records sound better than you had before can lead one to listen to music more, the best premise of all for having a good system.

 

I have (approx.) 3,000 LPs, 2,500 CDs, and 1,500 Hi-Res downloads - and a subscription to Presto Music streaming.  The streaming SQ never seems quite as good.

Of those 7,000 albums there are a probably two hundred that I listen to most frequently in the course of a year - but every so often I dig into the shelves, almost at random, for something different.

My appreciation of the performances is certainly increased by having a pretty good setup,  I have friends who have huge collections, and greater knowledge of music than I, but poor taste in gear, and the listening experience does not compare, the emotion of the performance does not come through in the same way.

 

@retiredaudioguy: For me hearing a good system raised my expectations. Listening to music through a poor (or even mediocre) system was no longer good enough---I knew I wasn’t hearing it as well as possible, and I was left wanting. In spite of that, hearing a song on the radio can still bring joy, but I can’t wait to get home to hear it on my system.

 

This is an audiophile site, not a music site. Other than occasional lists of favorite albums or bands, there is essentially no discussion of music on this site. And that’s fine. Music reproduction provides a thrill of its own, which is not necessarily a musical thrill. Good recordings of thunder storms or trains can sound thrilling on a good system. As the OP (or someone above) put it, no shame in that.

Moreover, just comparing the size of one’s music library as an indicator of one’s love of music rather than audio reproduction misses the mark. There are libraries and there are libraries. Used book stores often sell books by the yard for interior decorating. Owning a lot of books doesn’t mean you’ve read them. And even if you have, there are books worth reading and books for decorating.

Get over it. On this site, we share a passion for music reproduction technology. Stereophile is read by people with that passion. With all due respect to John Atkinson, asking whether or not a Streophile reader has a music library that cost more than his system is not just beside the point, it is potentially insulting, and it begs all these other questions as well.