bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
I've got stereos all through my house hooked into an Apple airport. Music streams 24/7. In the living room, it's a stereo with bookshelf speakers. In the bedroom it's a boombox. It's like muzak only good music.
I started this whole audiophile journey because I wanted to enjoy my music more than I already did. I loved music before ever getting my first good set of speakers or headphones.
I think that anybody would appreciate music more if they were given the equipment to enjoy it at it's fullest.
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?
On the other hand. Spend a couple of weeks with some No-Fi and you stop caring.
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.
In my experience, no.
What "audiophiles" are good at is finding (or imagining) minute differences -- in soundstage, midrange, and "mouth shape" -- among different pressings of the same recording.