Do you think audiophiles have a much deeper appreciation of music than the general public?
- 123 Posts. Joined 5/2011
- Location: Horse Heaven Hills
- Select All Posts By This User
I really don't care for the term "audiophile" as it has a connotation of someone with more money than sense. I prefer to describe myself as a "hifi enthusiast". I feel hifi enthusiasts appreciate music much more than the general population. In the general population I know of very few people who listen to classical, opera, or jazz. All of my hifi friends buy and listen to these genres. All of my hifi friends scope out new music in what Americans refer to as "world music". All of the people that I know and desribe as hifi'ers regularly listen to Coltrane and Miles. In the general population these names are not even know.
With a real good system you can hear the words being sung. Most people don't care about lyrics, they care about the "hooks". Those people miss out on what the artist was trying to communicate. Paul Simon, listening to his music on a car radio, commented that it didn't even sound like his music. With a good system you can hear all instruments being play, readily recognize the voice of the backup singer, etc.
The problem here might be how we define "audiophile" and "hifi enthusiast" .
- 584 Posts. Joined 12/2010
- Location: In a vague and undetermined state.
- Select All Posts By This User
Many people i know who have a good appreciation of music far above "normal" have a preference for good sound. I wouldn't call them audiophiles per say and they certainly do not and would not spend the kind of money people on this board are willing to spend on equipment, but many of them are willing (and have done so) to shell out extra money for better equipment.
Well, when I started, all I know were the musicians on the radio. I learned about baroque, classical, jazz, Horowitz, Liszt, Bach, canon, Vivaldi, etc... from reading Stereophile and TAS. And which are bad, good and great recordings.
Audiophile periodicals can (sometimes) point out well recorded, mixed or mastered albums (or those purported to be.) They aren't very good repositories of musical information, and there are a wealth of sources out there that are far more accurate and well informed about music, from the baroque age to the modern era. One of my favorites as a classical pianist is clavier - I still have all the back issues dating back to the '40's and will occasionally pick up snippets of valuable info that 20 years of professional training haven't imparted.
To elaborate on my original short answer - audiophiles are hi-fi enthusiasts. This sometimes goes hand in hand with being a musical enthusiast but I have not seen a significantly higher percentage of well-versed musicophiles among audiophiles than among the general populace.
Those periodicals were not just about wires or equipment for that matter. Contribute rather than criticize where people learn about audio and music in general, there are already too many critical experts here.
I haven't seen much of a correllation between audiophiles and well recorded music either. A lot of them seem to focus on 14KT gold Japanese CDs and fancy vinyl reissues of music from the late 70s that wasn't all that well recorded in the first place.