Do you think audiophiles have a much deeper appreciation of music than the general public? - Page 5

Dreadful.

The nature of audiophiles would allow us to appreciate music more wouldn't it?  I mean, audiophiles have a need for quality audio equipment.  The quality equipment then logically leads to a better quality sound.  Doesn't the better quality sound then go on to a better appreciation of what the music is?  How the melodies move and the harmonies sound in relation to the melodies?  The better sound allows us to hear the voices more clearly, the drum strokes more distinctly, and the guitar rifts sound cleaner.  

 

Doesn't the nature of the audiophile allow us to have a deeper appreciation of music?

 

I should also address that while quality equipment may bring "better quality" sound, that this may not be the sound the listener is looking for and therefore potentially not make the music any better for the listener.

I would say audiophiles have a much stronger appreciation for proper playback gear and recording gear but not music in general. Some of my friends enjoy music with their ibuds just as much as my audiophile friends and I do.

 

Is it then important to ask are they appreciating the sound quality? Are they missing an element to listening to music when they use ibuds instead of hi-fi equipment?

There is a lot of fantastic music recorded in the pre-stereo era... Jazz, blues, classical, popular, country, R&B, rock n roll... Tons of music. If one can appreciate earlier recordings, even if they're not in stereo or hifi, then the music is clearly first and foremost to them.

I would agree with you bigshot. Can you appreciate this early recorded music more with hi-fi equipment? 

 

With all of what I've said, music can be appreciated without the hi-fi equipment.. point made with the early recorded music and listening without high quality audio.

Edited by hardbrockcafe - 10/24/12 at 8:50pm

I'd say the better-than-ibuds equipment I own helps me appreciate quite a bit of it. It helped a lot appreciating jazz, to give one example, which I didn't like prior to investing in better headphones than the pair I'd used with my computer for 15 years. 

 

A great old classic I found was a Muddy Waters album, Folk Singer. Absolutely one of the most amazing recordings I've ever come across. 

 

The question about audiophiles is an interesting one. It depends what they seek. The best way to appreciate music is to play it oneself though I reckon. Then you really appreciate how amazing many artists are.

It's not a yes or no sort of question. Definitely some audiophiles are music lovers and that love is what drives them. But there are other people for whom the recording quality and equipment are the main focus. Take that binaural recording Chesky did for Head-Fi. Amazing imaging, not all that interesting as music.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/550220/chesky-records-makes-a-high-rez-album-for-head-fiers-in-binaural

The only advantage my main rig has over my small stereos and boom boxes is that I never have to adjust the tone controls on my main rig because it's calibrated. Sometimes I have to tweak my cheap stereos.

Check out the album KoKo Taylor and Willie Dixon did together, Currawong.

Do you know the name of the album?  I listened to "I Am the Blues" last night and decided I need more Willie.

If this doesn't blow your socks off, you're dead, man!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq3QySTQlmI

 

Amazon Link: http://www.amazon.com/Koko-Taylor/dp/B00005B7GU

Thanks bigshot. That is an awesome song. CD has been ordered.

There is a Chess 3 CD box set of Willie Dixon that is worth having too.

Boom-Box, Boom-BOX's ... Betcha it's a Bose, which are the BEST ;')

 

Telling me your Boom-Box serves up the atmosphere contained on recordings such as "Jazz At The Pawnshop" ... Whatever...