4 Likes
This has been a fun thread to read, for the most part. I’m a little sad that “audiophile” is considered by so many to be an undesirable label or pejorative term. I guess it’s probably because of snootiness and condescending attitudes exhibited by a small but vocal percentage of those who identify as such.
Personally, I don’t think there’s a minimum dollar figure that must be spent to gain entry. Someone can assemble an enjoyable system from bits in their uncle’s attic or a few lucky visits to the local thrift shop. Being an audiophile is one’s approach to set up–striving to achieve the most realistic sound reproduction they can with whatever playback system they have cobbled together.
If you can accept this framework, virtually all audiophile-deniers in this thread are in the club, whether they want to be or not. You know who you are, and no hard feelings from me if you still don’t want to call yourselves audiophiles. …well, with the possible exception of those who have built dedicated listening rooms yet continue to assert that they have little or no interest in high-fidelity sound reproduction. That’s a head-scratcher. 
6 Likes
The same seems to be true of “wealthy” or “rich”… 
2 Likes
Interestingly, I think. I have never actually used the term audiophile though I might in the future.
I consider myself to be a Hi-Fi enthusiast AND music lover in equal parts. Having spent 55 years working hard, providing for my family & saving for a “rainy day,” I can finally spend on my hobby without conscience.
8 Likes
Very good 
1 Like
Wonderful response Paul…
This is exactly what I have been telling my wife I will be doing with my hard earned retirement funds when I pack away my work computer in a couple of years and have even more listening time available 
3 Likes
You cite two definitions of audiophile and assume that they mean the same. But they don’t. The difference lies in the qualifier ardent. According to the second definition, anyone with an interest in hi-fi sound reproduction qualifies as an audiophile, whereas in the first one that label is reserved for those with an ardent interest. I believe that the first definition is more to the point, as it limits the field of applicability. Then second definition is quite useless — who in the Roon community would not be part of that set?
What does it mean to be ardent abut an interest in sound reproduction? I’d say 1) a constant search for sound optimisation 2) the willingness to spend a great deal of one’s disposable income on that interest.
1 and 2 are intimately linked. Optimising sound, whether we like it or not, is expensive, in some cases hugely expensive. An audiophile will not rest content with a 5000 € system, nor with a 20000 € or 50000 € one. There’ll always remain something to be optimised. Should you run out of funds, as most of us do at some point, you will have to opt out of the audiophile game. Your finances represent an insurmountable obstacle to your pursuit of auditory perfection. At best you will tinker around and exchange one element for another, but you’re no longer truly optimising.
And that’s why, despite having a dedicated listening room, I don’t consider myself an audiophile. I am not interested in constant optimisation and I am certainly not willing to spend an inordinate amount of my disposable income on my system. Inordinate is relative of course, but I’m not interested in people who have so much money that they can spend inordinate sums on just about anything. Those people cannot have a true sense of value, as it is only sacrifice that makes something valuable and makes you aware of its value to you. You need to choose: either this OR that — it’s that choice that imparts value and also makes you understand what you truly value. If you can have this AND that, where’s the value? You may convince yourself that you value it, but you’ll never know to what extent you truly value it. And you can’t claim to be ardent about it.
Recently I’ve been looking at the Chord Electronics M Scaler, which here in Europe sells for 4700 €. It has got rave reviews, and it might just be the thing to further optimise my set-up. Will I buy it? No — because I’d rather spend that money on a nice couch in my listening room. Purely for aesthetic effect. Now, a true audiophile wouldn’t do that. As I said: it’s either this OR that. In that choice you discover who you are. Ardent or not.
2 Likes
This is where I think we disagree. In my view, one can be enthusiastic (even ardent) about high-fidelity sound reproduction without also being addicted to endless optimization and upgrades. No further changes are required once a setup consistently delivers engaging listening experiences. Contentment is a possible state for audiophiles.
In my practice of this hobby over the past decade, I’ve been gradually divesting and downsizing my gear, yet my enjoyment of sound reproduction in the room I’ve set up has never been higher.
At some point, I realized that moving the speakers an inch or two closer together makes a bigger difference than spending four figures on new cables. Adjusting the height of the speakers or listening position can improve sound more than buying a new DAC. Treating first reflections costs far less than a new amplifier but is far more impactful. Adding bass traps often improves bass more than buying new subwoofers.
For those stuck on the upgrade merry-go-round, shifting to making the most of what one has is a way to get off. There’s plenty of luxury gear out there, but none of it is necessary to be a happy audiophile. As Sheryl Crow once said, “It’s not having what you want It’s wanting what you’ve got.”
it is only sacrifice that makes something valuable and makes you aware of its value to you.
On this point, we may agree. For me over the past few years, sacrifices have been more about time spent iterating and tuning the system to the room than buying new stuff. That and sharing information about what works and doesn’t with likeminded audiophiles are what makes this hobby so much fun.
4 Likes
That’s obviously very subjective. One person’s “rich”, is another person’s “poor” and vice versa…
I don’t think anyone can really know what other people value or don’t value – no matter how much money they have. Such generalizations don’t help anybody.
1 Like
Couldn’t agree more.
1 Like
It’s a philosophical question, if you will. How can you determine whether you truly value something if don’t have to make a choice? For one person a coconut may look like a peanut and vice versa, but if everything is just peanuts to you, everything becomes valueless.
We need to have a sense of sacrifice to introduce value into our lives. Sacrifice comes from “making sacred”. The sacred being that which has the greatest value to you – so unless you make a sacrifice, you can’t achieve true value in your life. And if, because to you everything is just a peanut, you can’t have value. That’s not subjective.
I’m never impressed by anyone’s disposable income. What interests me is what makes that person burn, and how much that person has sacrificed (in terms of money, time, sheer doggedness) to keep the flame alive. And money only comes into the equation if you don’t have infinite amounts of it. So it’s easier to think in terms of time, because with regard to that we’re all equal (more or less).
“And if, because to you everything is just a peanut, you can’t have value.”
should read: “And if, because to you everything is just a peanut, you don’t need to make a sacrifice you can’t have value.”
….and an endless debate…
2 Likes
Good discussion and fair exchange of opinions in a wonderful audiophile? Community. Then if it gets a little more passionate, good thing it’s our shared hobby!
No it doesn’t have a negative connotation. I’m not mentally an audiophile yet because I don’t want to become one, but because I don’t know enough about it yet or use a different definition. Those who wish to make disparaging remarks about expensive equipment or poor equipment may do so with approval and disagreement, of course. After all, it’s just a personal attitude / experience.
We all start with a love of music and then concern ourselves with how to increase enjoyment. Only when we become gluttonous can audiophile be a burden and no longer a joy. But there are certainly more satisfied, than constantly dissatisfied music lovers. Music alone makes one happy. Whoever fails to do so, runs into the already described trap of satisfaction.
If it’s just a display with little use, it doesn’t get any bigger, but why shouldn’t others enjoy it? It is not envy that drove us into this hobby!
Yes we need to rediscover real values, it starts with good discussion culture. Thank you for this, you are always controversial interesting to me and I value other opinions. Of course I always have to put my two cents in as well.
We should freely share our different opinions and experiences for learning curves. The benefit to this community grows, with better purchases and knowledge. The amount of money does not determine the sound quality alone. It goes with even with tinkering and acquiring knowledge, as well as thirty year old analog technology plus DAC that does not get the highest approval in the HiFi magazines.
Here we are on the same wavelength, only that my knowledge is still much smaller, but with you I will grow and may soon call myself an audiophile out of deep conviction with very poor hearing.
By that criteria I would even be an audiophile, I spend a lot of time with my music.
Yes, but you first to need to buy these expensive cables and try them out to determine whether perhaps fiddling with speaker placement will actually make a bigger difference. If you’re into downsizing now, that means that you were into upsizing before. In the end, you can’t get money out of the equation.
Here, self-help is free of charge and as a technician, in the customer’s interest, I must also hand over the golden audio cable upon request or refer to another dealer if the customer does not like my other advice. In this situation, I have to test everything I want to offer not only in theory, but also in practice.
You don’t have to buy cables just to try them out. And you don’t have to try them out to know that other links in the audio chain will definitely make a bigger difference (e.g. room acoustics, choice of speakers, speaker placement, listening position etc.).
The Latin verb “audire” simply means “to listen” and the Greek noun “φίλος” just means “friend”. In this (literal) sense, not every “audiophile” needs a shrink or help from a financial advisor.
2 Likes
That is true, but only to some extent. From my experience, I can say that upgrading has made a big difference to my enjoyment of music, especially when it comes to orchestral sound. That said, technical audiophile considerations should always take a back seat to what matters, and that is music. And that’s why I agree with you to some extent. But the audiophile component is there, and shouldn’t be underestimated.
2 Likes
The short answer to the OP’s original question is “it depends”
Go to any audio show and if you love music you will be horrified at the music being used to demo the equipment.
Another example of why music lovers question whether or not audiophiles actually love music is any of The Absolute Sound’s Super Disc Lists, which are basically playlists of music from any audio show. Here’s an example: The HP Super LP List (or as I like to call it The Super List of Recordings to Avoid).
Now this does not mean that every audiophile has horrible taste in music but for many people the very public face of the world audiophiles, i.e. audio shows and publications, does beg the question of do audiophiles actually like music?
3 Likes
Hi Ralph, as you know, I share your passion for good jazz, but if I decided to go to an audio show (never been to one, to be honest), I’d mainly go there to check out new equipment and certainly not with the expectation that designers/dealers etc. choose my kind of music for their demos… Let’s face it, exposure to jazz just makes most people want to run away as fast as they can. 
In other words, beauty is in the ear of the listener…
1 Like