Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › 'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths - Page 5

post #61 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

If I'm reading Anaxilus correctly, I agree that a single rig end-game is totally possible.

Lol, "dem commoners" must think we're insane with the amount of cash value we attach to cans.

In the mind of the audiophile-oriented man:

"2.2k for setup. Pleased. Good value. Could be worse."

In the mind of the common consumer:

"Can't believe the rechargeable batteries @ 20$. Damn Beats. As if Best Buy didn't charge me enough."
post #62 of 286
Thread Starter 

Dunno - I'm thinking that there would be many out there prepared to pay for a good DAP and a pair of $400+ IEMs who would still question the notion that anyone is prepared to pay 15K for a single headphone rig, If Anaxilus would just nominate a single sub-2K SS amp that could drive the AD2K to 90% of its theoretical best, I'd leave you lot to it. Promise.  biggrin.gif

post #63 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post


1-Maximum detail extraction.   

2-Natural tonality and timbre that mimicks what I hear w/ my naked ears.

3-Musical involvement.  Likely a combination of the two above.


Fair enough- and I thus completely understand your tactics and means of achieving this.  And don't get me wrong, I mostly understand where you are coming from and I'm partially playing devil's advocate.

 

So what we are talking about here (for you) is reality re-creation?  And if so, this would only apply to un-amplified ('Unplugged' as they say) music, and would exclude pretty much all rock and roll, ambient/new age, electonic(a), anything with a guitar or keyboards, less than pristine recordings, or older recordings like Charlie Parker or Billie Holiday?  Again, please read the above about playing devil's advocate- I'm just honestly trying to figure a lot of this out myself.  smile.gif

post #64 of 286

The ironic reality is that the so-called "high-end" fanatics are the most unlikely of candidates for owning an "end-game" system because they themselves steadfastly refuse to submit to any bounds of accountability, objective and independent control.  The insistence on and claims of hearing things that are beyond the evolutionary capabilities of the human hearing apparatus and cognitive system, coupled with their propensity to part with their money at the drop of a hat in response to unproven claims of equipment superiorty and the refusal to make an attempt at keeping themselves honest, makes for a forever changing rules of the "game".  In this respect, the "high-end" audiophiles pursuit of an end-game rig is akin to a dog chasing its tail.  They are trapped in a race of their own making.  There can be no end-game when the players fudge the rules throughout the game and refuse to to subject themselves to any refereeing.


Edited by Mauricio - 4/8/12 at 1:18am
post #65 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post



Fair enough- and I thus completely understand your tactics and means of achieving this.  And don't get me wrong, I mostly understand where you are coming from and I'm partially playing devil's advocate.

So what we are talking about here (for you) is reality re-creation?  And if so, this would only apply to un-amplified ('Unplugged' as they say) music, and would exclude pretty much all rock and roll, ambient/new age, electonic(a), anything with a guitar or keyboards, less than pristine recordings, or older recordings like Charlie Parker or Billie Holiday?  Again, please read the above about playing devil's advocate- I'm just honestly trying to figure a lot of this out myself.  smile.gif

I did a double-take on the first sentence.
I'll let anaxilus speak for himself smily_headphones1.gif
post #66 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

The ironic reality is that the so-called "high-end" fanatics are the most unlikely of candidates for owning an "end-game" system because they themselves steadfastly refuse to submit to any bounds of accountability, subjectivity and independent control.  The insistence on and claims of hearing things that are beyond the evolutionary capabilities of the human hearing apparatus and cognitive system, coupled with their propensity to part with their money at the drop of a hat in response to unproven claims of equipment superiorty and the refusal to make an attempt at keeping themselves honest, makes for a forever changing rules of the "game".  There can be no end-game when the "rules" are changed at every turn.  In this respect, the "high-end" audiophiles pursuit of an end-game rig is akin to a dog chasing its tail.  They are trapped in a race of their own making.



So you agree with me in that respect that it's not likely ever?
However, I might inquire upon your adamant proclamation that all "high-end" audiophiles suffer from this self-induced trap.
I don't believe it's everyone out there. And many of us are quite finicky and fickle when it comes down to shelling out hundreds if not thousands.

* I love C.C. All this time. Dedicated to you. <3
To make my 1,500 post in this thread:
After much delay on my part I might add.
post #67 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post

To make my 1,500 post in this thread:
After much delay on my part I might add.

In light of that, we must take a break from all of the seriousness if only for a moment...  5lbs.jpg  biggrin.gif

post #68 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

If I'm reading Anaxilus correctly, I agree that a single rig end-game is totally possible.


single rig end-game is only possible if you have a single static set of criteria.  Almost every current flagship headphone has some areas where it can be bested by other headphones; AFAIK these are properties that cannot be fully rectified by selecting other components for synergy.  There will always be compromises, but IME the pursuit of endgame is an exercise in minimising these compromises, and choosing equipment where the unalterable compromises are not in areas which are important to your music listening.

 

Currently I have a hard enough time discerning which qualities are flaws and which are strengths.  Quite often I will make a change to my setup, and then a month later decide the change was for the worse.  Anaxilus' reference to Meno is absolutely spot on, at this point if I cam across a potential end-game setup I would likely not not be able to recognise it as such.  I have a feeling I will be spending many more thousands before I am satisfied enough with my setup, if that point will ever come.

post #69 of 286


Unfortunate but true. And I would have to agree with the premise here; I'm not condemning everyone, but this absolutely rings true in many, many cases. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

The ironic reality is that the so-called "high-end" fanatics are the most unlikely of candidates for owning an "end-game" system because they themselves steadfastly refuse to submit to any bounds of accountability, objective and independent control.  The insistence on and claims of hearing things that are beyond the evolutionary capabilities of the human hearing apparatus and cognitive system, coupled with their propensity to part with their money at the drop of a hat in response to unproven claims of equipment superiorty and the refusal to make an attempt at keeping themselves honest, makes for a forever changing rules of the "game".  In this respect, the "high-end" audiophiles pursuit of an end-game rig is akin to a dog chasing its tail.  They are trapped in a race of their own making.  There can be no end-game when the players fudge the rules throughout the game and refuse to to subject themselves to any refereeing.



 

post #70 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

In light of that, we must take a break from all of the seriousness if only for a moment...  5lbs.jpg
  biggrin.gif

Aww thanks!
Glad to see I'm not completely ignored at 2 in the morning haha.

Cheers to you biggrin.gif
post #71 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

 

So what we are talking about here (for you) is reality re-creation?  And if so, this would only apply to un-amplified ('Unplugged' as they say) music, and would exclude pretty much all rock and roll, ambient/new age, electonic(a), anything with a guitar or keyboards, less than pristine recordings, or older recordings like Charlie Parker or Billie Holiday?  Again, please read the above about playing devil's advocate- I'm just honestly trying to figure a lot of this out myself.  smile.gif


Actually a good portion of my test CD are specific high quality binaural recordings.  Similar to what you'd find on the Ultrasone demo disc ironically enough.  rolleyes.gif  

 

Applaus, fireworks, Chakraphons, waves crashing, etc.  If something can pass stuff like that, which not everything does regardless of price or status, I move on to music w/ sufficient layering, complexity and detail as a technical test and of how something responds to my specific genre bandwidth.  I can't really say there is any genre of music I don't or won't listen to.    

post #72 of 286

People are free to chase their own tails to their heart's content.  The issue turns problematic, however, when these tail-chasers anoint themselves the arbiters of audio quality by the mere virtue of having listened or owned some exobitantly priced equipment,  while proffering no independent, subjective verfication for their outlandish claims.  The issue turns problematic when these tail-chasers purport to be taken as authorities when their failure to acknowledge their cognitive biases and the limitations of human hearing compromises their position from the outset.  The issue turns problematic when the tail-chasers hector and condescend those who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid.  The issue turns problematic when there is a conspiracy of idiocy that takes this state of affairs as normal or even desirable, and which acts in unison to suppress anyone wishing to add a bit of rationality to the debate.

 

 


Edited by Mauricio - 4/8/12 at 8:16am
post #73 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

People are free to chase their own tails to their heart's content.  The issue turns problematic, however, when these tail-chasers anoint themselves the arbiters of audio quality by the mere virtue of having listened or owned some exobitantly priced equipment,  while proffering no independent, subjective verfication for their outlandish claims.  The issue turns problematic when these tail-chasers purport to be taken as authorities when their failure to acknowledge their cognitive biases and the limitations of human hearing comprimises their position from the outset.  The issue turns problematic when the tail-chasers hector and condescend those who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid.  The issue turns problematic when there is a conspiracy of idiocy that takes this state of affairs as normal or even desirable, and which acts in unison to suppress anyone wishing to add a bit of rationality to the debate.



While you certainly make a point to some extent, I don't think you could be any more wrong in regards to the typical head-fi crowd who happens to own high priced gear. As has been said, for the most part, people are rather passionate and been getting to where they are through a long journey. You're pretty much treating these people as deep pocketed deaf dummies and this does not sound like the common profile over here. I could go as far as thinking, you're the one having some trouble with money (and or hearing) and possibly reacting angrily toward those who can afford more (possibly discern more). This is not a pissing contest for most passionate head-fiers.  And if it was, people simply would not stay that long (or at least, there's much more to spend over in the speaker world).

post #74 of 286

Whether I can or cannot afford more is immaterial to the issue at hand.  It is a red-herring.

 

Whether I can or cannot discern more has been settled by evolution.  That too is a red-herring.

post #75 of 286


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauricio View Post

Whether I can or cannot afford more is immaterial to the issue at hand.  It is a red-herring.

 

Whether I can or cannot discern more has been settled by evolution.  That too is a red-herring.



So you say, but at least, it would explain your endeavor on this site. In French, we would say it's similar to "pissing in a violin", i.e. there's little to gain in trying to argue against all and everyone. For that matter, I will apply the quote to myself and leave you peacefully in your denial ;0).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › 'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths