Should people who can't solder, build or test their speakers be considered audiophiles?



  So, if you bought that Porsche but can only drive it and not fix it do you really understand and appreciate what it is? I say no. The guy who can get in there and make it better, faster or prettier with his own hands has a superior ability to understand the final result and can appreciate what he has from a knowledge base and not just a look at what I bought base. I mean sure you can appreciate that car when you drive it but if all you do is take it back to the dealership for maintenance and repairs you just like the shape with no real understanding of what makes it the mechanical marvel it is.
  I find that is true with the audio world too. There are those who spend a ton of money on things and then spend a lot of time seeking peer approval and assurance their purchase was the right one and that people are suitably impressed. Of course those who are most impressed are those who also do not design, build, test or experiment.

  I propose that an audiophile must have more than a superficial knowledge about what he listens to and must technically understand what he is listening to. He knows why things work and what his end goal is and often makes his own components to achieve this. He knows how to use design software to make speakers that you can't buy and analyze the room they are in and set up the amplification with digital crossovers and DSP. He can take a plain jane system and tweak it and balance it to best suit the room it is in. He can make it sound far better than the guy who constantly buys new components based on his superficial knowledge who does not understand why what he keeps buying in vain never quite gets there.

  A true audiophile can define his goal and with hands on ability achieve what a mere buyer of shiny parts never will. So out comes the Diana Krall music and the buyer says see how good my system is? The audiophile says I have taken a great voice and played it through a system where all was matched and tweaked or even purposely built and sits right down next to Diana as she sings. The buyer wants prestigious signature sound and the audiophile will work to achieve an end result that is faithful true to life audio as though you were in the room with Diana as she sings. The true audiophile wants true to life and not tonally pure according to someones artificial standard.

 So are you a buyer or an audiophile and what do you think should make a person an audiophile?
mahlman

Showing 11 responses by speedbump6

Lol, next it will be the difference between those who can read instructions from a kit and build a speaker or crossover, and those who can order the raw parts and design their own. This forum would be a very small world if we start discounting what I’m going to assume is the majority of the people who enjoy this hobby. Do nascar fans have to race at least at an amateur level to be considered a true fan. Maybe that’s the reason why we even have. BLM movement in 2020. We keep looking for ways to exclude people rather than include them. Wouldn’t this hobby be better if more people enjoyed it? There might be more technology and more resources able to be thrown at it if there were more money involved. Don’t look for ways to divide and exclude, look for ways to engage and include. 
Mahlman seems to be upset with people who can afford more than he can, that seems to be where the source of his frustration comes from. I suppose the best of anything dosnt cost more than the average, or less than average? I’ve seen people who don’t really make much, save for years to buy an expensive component, not because they are rich. And people who have money and can afford more expensive equipment, must be excluded and because they can afford it, makes them snobs? Seems the OP is displaying a snobbery of a different type. The type that is jealous of what they cannot have. I cannot afford the very highest end of equipment, but why should it bother me that there are those who can. I’m sure some people do purchase expensive equipment just to show off. So what. It’s their money, and that person isn’t really an audiophile in that respect. But that sort of person probably isn’t on forums like this, as we arnt the ones they’re trying to impress. Why can’t the guy who has a 2k system and the one who has a 200k system both enjoy what they have and pleasure they derive from what they hear. That would be like saying if I make 2 million a year, that I should live in a 100k home. Why should I? To make the guy that can only afford the 100k home happy and give him something for him to be jealous about? Or I should t own a Bentley if I could afford it for the same reason? Anyone knows if you own a Ferrari, Aston Martin, etc, that you can really appreciate cars, right? I’m sure that anyone with even a small amount of common sense realizes this whole idea is ridiculous. Stop trying to define what other can and cannot be, based on what you can or cannot be. 
Robert, if you’ve read malmans posts, it dosnt seem like he’s kidding. Of course he could just be so bored with real life that he has nothing g better to do than get reactions in forums. Kind of sad either way.
Glass universe? What is that photo supposed to be showing or prove? Are those the ashes of someone’s passed relative tapped to the cables? And why would we care I wonder. Jkf I think it boils down to some people have self image issues and if they’re part of a smaller more exclusive club then maybe their sense of self worth will have been raised. People outside of the hobby arnt audiphiles either, but I never miss a chance to try to start a coverstaion on the subject to see if we can add a new recruit to the hobby. 
Actually top gear has been known to saw cars in half, on multiple occasions. In addition to all the above mentioned activities. 
From my experience most musicians are not into as accurate a sound as most audiophiles Hgh I’m sure there are ones who want the ultimate in accuracy also. They are people like the rest of us, and each have their own preferences as well.  
Mahlman, so you have a bias against B&w as well I see. So one of my others systems with 800D3s is also terrible, as is mine with the Tekton Ulfers. I guess my Wilson Sasha Daws will be next on the list, lol. What a live performance sounds like? So many different setups, different amplification methods used, or non amplified, different acoustics. Live has many different sounds. Trying to group it as one sound dosnt seem to make much sense. And since acoustics are not great at many venues, I’d say live isn’t really the end goal holy grail sound to me. Recorded in a studio where acoustics can be better controlled makes more sense in my mind. Live can be fun for the entertainment, not always so much for the quality of the sound
I shill Synergistci research? When did this happen? I have bought their products, but I am not in the audio business any more than I spend lots of money in the industry for my personal listening pleasure. And if it’s not ok to talk about the products you own, and why you might or might not like them, then this whole forum is a waste of time. Mahlman, it seems you are just against things that are outside your budget range. There are products outside my budget also, but I would not turn down a chance to hear them, much less assume I would dislike them. Also seems that they’re probabaly are not many things you do like based on your additional comments about music recordings. M thinking you and kenjit should collaborate and create speakers and a proper recording studio. I would agree that B&w from the early 2000s were nothing special to me, but the 800d3s do sound very nice. I tend to buy much of my equipment on the used market and let someone else take the big depreciation hit, so I’m not paying full dollar. More value for the money that way, and I don’t have to spend hundreds of hours breaking it in. 
To me it’s sad if your only intention for posting what you did was for the value of the reactions. Must still be stuck at home with nothing to do, no new tv programming and running out of constructive activities