Agreed. Music is so much more than just a frequency-response curve.
I’m into classical music, and to truly enjoy that music you need:
- a decent set-up (that’s the audiophile must): you won’t get all the thrills with € 1000 gear – you need to spend much more
- a decent recording – alas, some recordings, even recent ones, are not very good (I compare the recorded sound to a live performance)
- musicological knowledge (if, for instance, you don’t understand how counterpoint works, what exactly are you listening to in Bach?
Points 1) 2) and 3) are equally important. To truly enjoy the music, though, you need to add a fourth point: always listen to the music, never to your gear (assuming you have a decent system). Because if you’re obsessed with your gear, the music will always be less than absolutely satisfying, as (theoretically) there will always be ways to improve the sound. You’ll be busy tweaking this or that rather than reading up on the history of, say, the Renaissance madrigal.
And then, you have to reach what I call auditory wisdom – there comes a point where your system just sounds good and you should leave it at that. Could it sound better? Possibly (a big maybe), but then a) upgrades will cost you for fortune b) wouldn’t your time have been better spent on developing your knowledge of the music (comparing, for example, different interpretations of the same piece)?
Finally: there comes the point where your audiophile passion turns into a financial graveyard (but if you are loaded, that may be a negligible concern), but more importantly: an unhealthy obsession. You will never be satisfied and that’s not a wise way of living one’s life.
3 Likes
I’m just pleased that audiophiles have existed and continue to exist, driving the sound quality of recordings, post-production and playback.
I’m definitely an audiophile. I care enormously about the sound quality of the music I listen to. The difference in engagement and emotion is enormous with great sounding music. Does that mean it stops me liking music? No. Does that mean it makes me like certain music above other music, based purely on sound quality. Absolutely. I love Oasis but their records sound very poor and that reduces my enjoyment. I also love Cat Stevens and his records sound fantastic. That makes me listen to Cat Stevens more than Oasis.
5 Likes
An alternative description of an audiophile.
Audiophiles surely are not only tinkerers and tuners.
1 Like
Poseidon, Brother of Zeus, we fish in different spheres. The seas of the Apple world are not yet full of Hi-Res. One has just caught a small fish there that goes by the name of Primephonic, but it is already dead. This decent set-up has been buried in the hope that after months of further fishing, a bigger Apple fish will come into the Hi-Fi world.
In one important respect, we are looking at the same oceans:
At Apple, the only thing you can still get for less than €1,000 is the cleaning cloth for the set-up. What a thrill for the Android fishermen.
Those who fish classically are already right, the many new small fish have to grow up first. Of course, a composition from this year no longer fulfils this requirement. So popular fishing in all genres is out of the question. It has to be classic.
I also enjoy an old cassette recording, regardless of whether it has already been restored by good sound engineers or has found its way into the oceans of music consumption. Of course, sometimes it’s just 40 to 50-year-old Krautrock, but for me it has thrills like being there live.
With this divergent attitude to music, I remain, from your musicological point of view, the counterpoint or counter-voice you studied, but that doesn’t mean everything has to go down the drain with me. Bach exist!
We are still united by the harmony that the focus should not be on the equipment but first on the music. The obsession of owning expensive fishing gear does not replace the fish stock or its catch. However, it has been reported that audiophiles around Roon tell of their good catches of fish. They are in the vast minority on the oceans of music, but why not take a look or listen there? If the sound improves at an acceptable price, only the balance in your bank account might still speak against it.
Of course, the preoccupation with the music itself is without question the high goal for everyone here. Those who are very intensively involved with music remain an exotic for the majority. Only 10% of humanity buys music at all from time to time. Even the subscribers to the music services do not manage a higher quota. It’s probably the same 10% of humantity, but 50% of this musiclovers.
Small exclusive circles everywhere with intersections to your auditory wisdom. Happiness is being able to do what you want. Study music history or ignore it. Buying the most expensive or cheapest stereo in the world…only happiness is not a purchasable commodity.
It’s the music in our ears that makes it beautiful, and the music we choose for ourselves can be a pleasure to listen to in rent at low cost in high resolution on a €30 USB DAC with a 30-year-old amplifier/receiver. If you want good quality and processing, you are in good hands here with around 100 € per year fpr Roon.
Those who want to spend more and see improvements should do so.
I agree but yet I don’t agree…
I understand that music is more than just a range of frequencies. But take a song, put a filter on it that cuts off high and low frequencies. Say, from 20-20.0000Hz, you are left with 80-12.000 Hz. The latter is what I can hear (as an example). Where is the dynamic in the song?
But I understand that it’s just not simply cutting of these high and low frequencies. Our hearing degrades slowly, so what I felt like a well-recorded song at the age of 20, will still sound good in my ears at the age of 50.
What’s the point in having 10000 €/$ speakers if the acoustics in the room you set them up is rubbish? Everything depends on the floor tiles, wall coverings, furniture, reflections, carpets, curtains, and…your hearing.
1 Like
- I’ve noticed that in response to some of my posts you refer to Apple. Why? What has Apple got to do with anything I’ve said in this particular post?
- “So popular fishing in all genres is out of the question. It has to be classic.” What do you mean? I refer to classical music, because that’s what I’m listening to, and when I give examples, I’d rather bring stuff that I am actually knowledgeable about. It wouldn’t do in my case to talk about rock because I know next to nothing about it from a musicological view. My point was simply that ‘enjoying’ music also involves knowing what exactly you’re listening to. As far as classical music goes: if you don’t know anything about the sonata form, for instance (and to pick a simple example), you won’t understand the piece from a structural point of view. You won’t understand how or why the composer chose to have this or that segment at this particular moment. You wouldn’t for instance understand Schubert’s extraordinary modifications of the sonata form and thus would not truly understand his musical genius. I’m sure it’s the same with jazz.
- And yes, to quote myself: “you won’t get all the thrills with € 1000 gear” – that seems pretty obvious. I didn’t say any thrills – I said ALL the thrills. I only got back into serious music listening a few years back and I’ve come some way. There’s a world of difference between the sound I now enjoy compared to what I had some years ago. And my enjoyment has massively increased. Try listening to Bruckner on a “cheap” system. You can, of course, and you might even enjoy it. But once you have a good system – you’d never go back to the “cheap” one. It’s the same with cars. Once you’ve driven a Mercedes, you’ll never be thrilled by a Renault again.
There is a necessary audiophile component to the maximum enjoyment of music. And that doesn’t come cheap. What needs pointing out perhaps is that true audiophiles have deep pockets. I have questioned the wisdom of not being satisfied with your system at some point. But to reach that point, you do need to spend serious money. That’s just the way it is.
1 Like
Your hearing is what it is. The rest is your system.
Room acoustics are indeed important, that’s why I’ve invested in a dedicated listening room (without going overboard, though). I don’t consider myself an audiophile, only someone who cares about very good sound – I trust my ears (what else is there?) and my yardstick of good sound is that of a live performance. That’s easy with classical music, because there’s no electronic interference with the sound of a violin or a human voice in a live performance. So if on my system a violin or cello or clarinet sound the way I know they sound, then all’s good and I don’t need to upgrade anymore.
I might be wrong – but it’s not the lovers of classical music who tend to splash insane sums on their equipment. Again: once a violin sounds the way it should, what do you want to improve?
3 Likes
The misconception is the following: Yes, continuous tone auditory tests give you that response graph. But even those surviving hair cells, being part of a very complex nonlinear system, can generate nerve pulse trains that discriminate transients that from a Fourier decomposition point of view would involve frequencies above 12kHz.
1 Like
Come on man, aren’t you exaggerating a bit? A dedicated listening room???
Who on earth can say they have a “dedicated listening room”? Hey honey, I’ll be in my dedicated listening room… If you need me, call me…
I bet you also drive a BMW 7 series or a Mercedes S-class, or was it a Maserati Quatroporte?
Come on, be honest… And I’m not trying to mock you, you have all the right to be rich.
But 98% of the people who have a decent roof over their heads don’t have this kind of room. And I’m only talking about the rich countries. If there is a spare room, it’s one for the children. Or maybe you’re living in an apartment. No way you can make a special room for your music. It would drive your neighbours nuts…And even if you do have the space, furnishing this room already costs you a fortune.
Besides, don’t you play any music in your living room? or bedroom? or whatever?
So, sorry dude, I’m not following you this time.
1 Like
A small bedroom in a two up two down can be a dedicated listening room after the kid has moved out. You don’t have to make assumptions about others.
5 Likes
I don’t see what’s so unusual about a room fitted out for listening to music. Lots of people have that. You can also call that a home cinema room. I’ve combined the two – I usually listen to music in that room but I (and my family) also watch movies in it.
The walls and ceiling are soundproofed, so no hassle from neighbours nor my family. At any rate, it’s an individual house with no immediate neighbours.
Such a room doesn’t cost a fortune. And I don’t consider myself rich.
I do listen to music in my study – but that’s background music for the purpose of concentration. Not in the living room. That’s my wife’s domain (at least as far as music is concerned). My kids prefer their earplugs.
We also have a piano room – for my daughter and myself. Again, that’s nothing unusual. It’s just a room with a piano in it. (No, it’s not a Steinway.)
I do take my music seriously, as it brings a lot of joy to my life.
7 Likes
Many forum members have one (some even more than one) – as hundreds of photos prove. Just have a look at the “Showing (off) your Roon setup” thread(s)…
3 Likes
Press like a second time to “unlike” ….
3 Likes
Thank you.
Tom
Well, I have a dedicated listening room, that is to say professionally fitted out with acoustic panels calculated according to the responses of the room. My equipment is very high end and very expensive. But I’m 74 years old and I started with a transistor stuck to my ear. Sometimes it takes a lifetime, and many live performances, to seek and obtain your Grail. I mainly listen to classical music and I have the orchestra and the concert hall at home every day.
6 Likes
Me too, I’m unashamedly wealthy & have just put a nice meridian system in my Ferrari GT40 (I wish) 
Well, at least I have the listening room, that way the rest of the household doesn’t have to suffer my musical tastes.
4 Likes
Audiophiles need to have deep pockets, unless you can do things yourself.
You can build your own speakers for a lot less money. Make them in a way that you don’t need big amps or go active and use plate amps.
I agree that you will need a lttle more than $1000,- because second hand Yamaha NS-1000’s are not cheap anymore, also second hand Accuton drivers are not cheap. Build a very large box with a Celestion or so 15” woofer, no hifi speaker can match that kind of LF sound.
Don’t buy expensive cable’s.
Set up the speakers like in the textbook.
Sometimes I am an audiophile when I build new sruff. But when it’s finished I can easily just enjoy the music, so I do both.
1 Like
Me too, I am rich! I own a $5,000 system, even Mr. Gates, Musk’s HIFI systems cost less than mine, I am sure.
1 Like