Most annoying terminology used by audiophile today?

"It's as sexy as a warm english muffin" 

For some reason the term "ripe" bothers me when used to describe audio.

For example, "I found the midrange a bit too ripe for my liking."

I dunno.  When I hear ripe, my mind can't help but think of fruits and vegetables.    yummmmmm...

The term 'bright'. Almost everything detailed is accused of being bright.

"breath of life"

i'm hearing this way too often lately

"fun" - if there is a "fun" sound than the opposite is a "boring" sound - it gives mo absolutely no imagery of tonality.

SP, It's not supposed to. It's the feeling of the music, not how it sounds.

"lush", "ripe" - I can comprehend - these tonalities are generally lumped as "fun" when this also implies less than serious - I prefer the term "musical" or "analogue" - making this preference a serious interpretation of musical representation.  Using this logic - commonly perceived "neutral" must = "boring" - the head-fier that condemns a can to "fun" will never accept his alternative as "boring".

I always thought that fun sound meant more vibrant and dynamic, as if the (the sounds from) instruments are hitting you from all over the place, enjoyable.

Boring sound must be flat, etc.

What I don't like are the acronyms, like IMO, IMHO and IIRC <- what does it mean anyway?

Someone once posted what IIRC meant - but I forget.  I'm blaming the IMO and IMHO on objectivists that are a little inflexible with imagination and creativity.  IMHO.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SP Wild 

"lush", "ripe" - I can comprehend - these tonalities are generally lumped as "fun" when this also implies less than serious - I prefer the term "musical" or "analogue" - making this preference a serious interpretation of musical representation.  Using this logic - commonly perceived "neutral" must = "boring" - the head-fier that condemns a can to "fun" will never accept his alternative as "boring".

Fun to me has to do with PRAT, among other factors. A headphone might sound right, but just not have that toe tappin' feeling that others do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SP Wild 

Someone once posted what IIRC meant - but I forget.  I'm blaming the IMO and IMHO on objectivists that are a little inflexible with imagination and creativity.  IMHO.
 

If I recall correctly

In my opinion

In my humble opinion

oh and:

PRAT = pacing, rhythm and timing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxvla 

Fun to me has to do with PRAT, among other factors. A headphone might sound right, but just not have that toe tappin' feeling that others do.

Is that common consensus? that makes a little more sense.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxvla 

If I recall correctly

 

In my opinion

 

In my humble opinion

 

oh and:

 

PRAT = pacing, rhythm and timing.

I always thought IMHO = in my honest opinion.

Danceable

"Meaty midrange". i never liked this description or understood it.what does it mean?is it like vocals sound thick,spongy....???

also i dont like when someone say"i never heard this detail before in my life,its amazing.OMG!!""   this is silly because almost all headphones above $200 are detailed if driven by a good amp but the difference,some cans blend the details in the music and some are agressive like k701 or more high end headphones.

i hate it when anyone say about a particular cable it opened up and became more spacious after X amount of hours.i think it is an illusion because 90% with aftermarket cables owners use these exact same terms.