[fubar3]

>>Do you think audiophiles have a much deeper appreciation of music than the general public?
 
Am not an audiophile but I enjoy recordings more than live performances. The sound is much better after being filtered, mixed, and compressed. And some nut is not cranking the volume control.

 

[bigshot]

That's only because most current bands can't play their instruments without going back to punch in to cover their clams.

 

[adamlr]

i hardly think you can say that audiophiles/ hifi enthusiasts enjoy music more than anyone else... just because you care about sound quality more than most, doesnt mean you get a higher or better emotional response to the things you listen to... a guy at work listens to pop. he idealizes adel, more or less worshiping every song she releases. this is a man who enjoys the music he listens to. its a big part of his life at home, on the way to/from work, while studying etc. he uses his iphone 4 and the iems that came with it.
 
i know a guy who has something like 350 GB of music, im sure theres people here with just as much, he has sony headphones that cost him 35$ a couple of years ago.
 
and i dont have to go that far. my headphones havnt even arrived yet and iv been enjoying music for over 10 years. constantly searching for more artists and genres and expanding my collection. you can hardly call me an audiophile, but saying you have a deeper appreciation of music than i do because of the gear you use is just odd...
 
 
Quote:

>>Do you think audiophiles have a much deeper appreciation of music than the general public?
 
Am not an audiophile but I enjoy recordings more than live performances. The sound is much better after being filtered, mixed, and compressed. And some nut is not cranking the volume control.

 
i dont think live music and recorded music are meant to compete with each other. i think its a different experience, to be enjoyed in a different way.

 

[liqwidlord]

It's impossible to measure the appreciation level in anyone. Every person perceives things around them differently. I think audiophiles have a greater appreciation of good sound but that doesn't mean they like music more. My dad loves his music. He'd be lost without it. He appreciates all sorts of varying styles, yet he gets around listening to a pair of $40 sony buds and they rock his world. 
 
It's one thing to spend thousands of dollars on gear that allows you to hear sound crystal clear, to hear those symbols crash perfectly. You don't need high end gear to enjoy that same song. You can get just as much enjoyment, by allowing yourself to be swept up in the emotion of the song, and how it makes you feel as opposed to how it sounds.

 

[JadeEast]

Isn't that kind of like having an appreciation for the pens and paper Shakespere used to write his sonnets, and the aesthetics of fine bookbinding?

Absolutely. That's a good comparison. Like the words in the book, music is dependant on a "thing" to mediate the experience. We listen to the music through recordings and equipment not directly.

 

[garysohn]

Have you ever attended a performance of a Shakespeare work where you could not hear the lines because of the poor acoustics, an actor who does not stand where he should, or an actress who does not project her voice. I equate that to a properly chosen set-up system more than anything to do with paper.
My brother in law really likes Johnny Cash. But he isn't hearing everything that Johnny wanted him to hear, or Johny would not have included, for example; two violins instead of one, female backup singers instead of only men, etc.  On my brother-in-laws system it all sounds the same.  He just hears it differently.  You can't appreciate what you can not hear.
 

 

[bigshot]

A system that turns female backing vocals into male? Do they have one that turns accordians into guitars?

 

[yepimonfire]

Quote:

Have you ever attended a performance of a Shakespeare work where you could not hear the lines because of the poor acoustics, an actor who does not stand where he should, or an actress who does not project her voice. I equate that to a properly chosen set-up system more than anything to do with paper.
My brother in law really likes Johnny Cash. But he isn't hearing everything that Johnny wanted him to hear, or Johny would not have included, for example; two violins instead of one, female backup singers instead of only men, etc.  On my brother-in-laws system it all sounds the same.  He just hears it differently.  You can't appreciate what you can not hear.
 

that pretty much sums up how i feel about it.
 
EDIT: in my opinion, it's like looking at a painting behind dirty scratched glass and in bad lighting, it's hard to appreciate all of the things about it if you're not seeing it for what it is.

 

[Spyro]

No, not at all.  Proclaimed "audiophiles" will listen to bad music only because it may have been recorded well.
 
Seriously.  Good gear has NOTHING to do with it.  You will like and appreciate good music whether on a $10K sound system or a transister portable radio.
 
For those of you over 50...Do you ever wonder that you have wasted all this time getting acquired to great albums on bad gear....and here 20-25 years later now that you have great gear, because you have already played that album 200-300 times you just don't get the same high even on great gear...because you have already gone through the whole listening faze of that recording?
 
I think about this all the time.  All those Rush and Genesis albums listening on all those crappy $7 headphones back in the 70's.  I enjoyed it immensely at the time but to imagine having gone  through (learned) all those recordings on a pair of amped W4's.   How much more would I have enjoyed it?  Perhaps not more at all since I didn't know any better back then?
 
This is a great topic!

 

[yepimonfire]

Quote:

No, not at all.  Proclaimed "audiophiles" will listen to bad music only because it may have been recorded well.
 
Seriously.  Good gear has NOTHING to do with it.  You will like and appreciate good music whether on a $10K sound system or a transister portable radio.
 
For those of you over 50...Do you ever wonder that you have wasted all this time getting acquired to great albums on bad gear....and here 20-25 years later now that you have great gear, because you have already played that album 200-300 times you just don't get the same high even on great gear...because you have already gone through the whole listening faze of that recording?
 
I think about this all the time.  All those Rush and Genesis albums listening on all those crappy $7 headphones back in the 70's.  I enjoyed it immensely at the time but to imagine having gone  through (learned) all those recordings on a pair of amped W4's.   How much more would I have enjoyed it?  Perhaps not more at all since I didn't know any better back then?
 
This is a great topic!

i can't say i totally agree with you. having a good setup is what caused me to like and appreciate classical music. i used to try and listen to it on a cheap boombox and it sounded so boring, flat and lifeless i couldn't understand how anyone could enjoy it. once i got a decent setup, i tried it once more out of boredom one day and oh my god, the difference was so astounding, the boring, slow, lifeless music was now huge, dynamic, and rich. i loved it. i still love classical because of that. same thing with heavy metal music. i used to have a hard time understanding why in the world someone would listen to only noise, well, turns out it isn't noise, but on a low quality system with terrible transient response, it sounds like noise, on a good setup, it's a completely different experience. 
 
and guess what? both metal and classical are the two main genres i listen to nowadays. i think for some it really may be all about the gear, but not for me. it always has and always will be all about the music, and being able to truly hear every tiny detail of what it is i'm listening to.

 

[bigshot]

I've found that certain types of music sound better on different systems. For instance, rockabilly and early rock n roll sounds better on a boombox than on a good stereo.

 

[Zarathustra19]

No.  We're just much (much) more anal about how it sounds than other people.  I've seen people with HD 650's rave about the latest top 40 hit and I've seen people who listen over ibuds rhapsodize about the virtues of Jazz and Classical over metal.  On the whole, we have the same arguments about the virtues of different musical styles and performances that "lay people" have, but we add the complexity of bitrate, solid state v. tube, and acoustic design.  Basically, we do the same things as literary critics and educated readers do with books.
 
Cheers.
 

 

[Zarathustra19]

Quote:

Have you ever attended a performance of a Shakespeare work where you could not hear the lines because of the poor acoustics, an actor who does not stand where he should, or an actress who does not project her voice. I equate that to a properly chosen set-up system more than anything to do with paper.
My brother in law really likes Johnny Cash. But he isn't hearing everything that Johnny wanted him to hear, or Johny would not have included, for example; two violins instead of one, female backup singers instead of only men, etc.  On my brother-in-laws system it all sounds the same.  He just hears it differently.  You can't appreciate what you can not hear.
 

 


Just to play devil's advocate, I'll throw the same argument that I've heard a hundred times about literary intent out there.  Namely, it doesn't matter what the author (composer, performer) intends; rather, the most important thing is how the reader (listener) interprets the material.  Perhaps (in your scenario) the director told the actor to stand in that particular spot, or chose that particular venue, or instructed the actress to whisper, for dramatic effect due to his or her interpretation.  Namely, Johnny Cash may have intended for you to hear a certain twang of his guitar or for his bassist to play a note which you may not pick up on your gear, but it only matters how you hear it and what it means to you.  Music is subjective.  We as "audiophiles" apply objectivity in the form of our gear, but in the end a certain song will mean different things to different people, regardless of the equipment.
 
In the interest of full disclosure, I personally believe that sound quality is a hallmark of musical value, but it's easy to argue the converse.
 
Cheers.

 

[BloodyPenguin]

Personally, I have found my love for music has been slightly tainted by my new found pursuit of "Hi-Fi" sound.
 
I used to be ignorant.  I used "crappy" headphones and "crappy" speakers.  I would listen to my favorite albums over and over, none the wiser.
 
Now, I find even my favorite albums and songs, don't sound "right".  I am now always fiddling with my headphones or EQ trying to get to sound like it "should".
 
Though, things are starting to come back around for me.  I sold off most of my headphones.  I kept a few of my budget ones and am again just trying to enjoy my music like I used to.
 
 
Ignorance sometimes is bliss. 
 
..

 

[micrors4]

I feel like we consume more music than most so we can try our rigs, and it seems most listen to a wide range of music depending on the mood we are in, some have different tastes that others do not like but we all have a passion for music and a better understanding of that music than most as we like to focus on all the little details and meanings behind the music that most never understand.