[MacDEF]

Kelly, what Hirsch said.

You love music.

You attend headphone meets to try out many different combinations of headphones and amps, desperately trying to find the best match.

Walk up to your rig -- take a look at it.

You go on and on at length about how headphone A does this right or wrong, vs. headphone B which does this wrong and this right.

You've heard basically every good headphone on earth, and yet you're still not completely satisfied.

You spend hours and hours and thousands of posts on an Internet forum dedicated to headphones and audio.



Denial is more than a river in Africa.

Say it with me, brother.

"My name is Kelly, and I'm an audiophile."

For whatever reason, you don't *want* to be called an audiophile. But you are, my friend. Oh, yes... you definitely are.

 

[kelly]

Macdef

That is the single coolest emoticon I have ever seen.

The point of this thread, for me, was just to explain where I was coming from when I said it (I've actually said it a few times). Whether you agree with the syntax or not isn't really worth arguing over since I doubt Webster or Britanica would be any better authority on the matter than I'd be.

But I wonder this... those of you who reference how many hours I spend doing this or that. What if I slow down? Get busy or *gasp* take up another obsession. Then what? My priorities, wants and desires in an audio system would be the same. What if I got to the point where I decided to stop investing and kept my system the same for the next 30 years. Does that change your view? What if you'd met me last year when I had my Panasonic and 7506?

I've mentioned before that I worried that our club provided membership based on material purchases (albeit, in my opinion, unintentional). I sometimes worry that we convince our 16 year old users to argue with their dads over $150 cables and rather than blur the point of diminishing returns, we pretend it doesn't exist at all and that every extra $1000 you spend gives you an order of magnitude more performance. So many of you say that I'm an audiophile, in part, because I've purchased this or that. If I hadn't, then would I be denied membership? Would you really be so skeptical if I had only a CMOY and SR-60 and said, "I'm not really an audiophile"? Surely this distinction is not simply financial.

 

[Tomcat]

kelly,

2466 posts, most of them discussing music reproduction. And you're no audiophile?

kelly, face it, we all are, every Head-Fier is.

Let's make a deal: I won't call you obsessed, if you don't call me obsessed. Okay?

 

[Zanth]

The post was a fun read. I have fun with this hobby. I buy, I tube roll, I change up between my different phones. I am an audiophile. I may be a novice audiophile, no vinyl yet, but I enjoy the music and I want to extract the most from it, detail, musicality whatever.... I am also sensible and I won't go to the poor house over this stuff. I feel like Jon Beilin, I am so close now to the point where I would need to work a year just to get above what I have already...etc etc. I still cherish my sound though...so I put myself in the audiophile category. I wouldn't go back to a portable and stocks unless I had to. But perhaps herein lies a huge distinction. Some audiophiles refuse to listen to music if it is played on a certain grade of equipment. I on the other hand will listen to music I love on an AM radio if need be. The music always comes first. Give me the choice though of spending 7 bucks on an AM radio and $5000 on a sweet sounding setup and I will go the $5000 road every time (if money provides). Why? Because I will enjoy the music more. I am a music lover first but close behind I am an audiophile. Maybe Kelly is just visiting us here, but I highly doubt he will give up his super setup and trade it in for an AM radio. Dude, you are an audiophile, maybe a novice, maybe a temp, but for the time being you are part of the club, hell....you are our mascot

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

d membership based on material purchases (albeit, in my opinion, unintentional). I sometimes worry that we convince our 16 year old users to argue with their dads over $150 cables

<raises hand> That's me.

Kelly and I had a nice talk last night, and I realized something: I like my current system. I think I've reached a point where I can take a break, and just step back, and listen. Sure, the blockhead was amazing at the WOH tour. But is it really 5 or 6 times better? Of course not. Maybe in 2 years, when I get out of high school, I may upgrade. I may not. I'll decide when I come to that. But, for the next 2 years, I'm going to concentrate on cd buying. I don't consider myself an audiophile. I'm just beginning to get to the point where I can listen to equipment, and review it. I hope that maybe one day, I can be half as good as some of you guys are.

Like kelly, it seems to me that I may be only "visiting." I mean, look at Nik, the owner of the r10 and r-10H headphone amp. Where does he go now? What can he upgrade? So, thanks for everything guys. Thanks for the last year and a half, and here's to the coming years.

 

[kelly]

andrzejpw

I hope you took that the right way--no offense was intended. I didn't at all mean to imply that you can't be an audiophile if you're only 16, I only meant that if some people define membership with material purchases that getting "in" can be harder when you've got a 16 year old's income. (In the general sense guys--I know there are exceptional 16 year olds who become millionaires. </polticallycorrectdisclaimer>).

 

[BDA_ABAT]

Thanks for another fun read and starting another interesting thread! But, the question is, does it really matter?

Many of the subsequent posts have provided additional definitions/refinements of what they believe an audiophile is or is not. This probably means a.) there really isn't a "generally accepted" definition; and/or b.) it's an individual thing.

I'd bet that almost all of the regular posters at this forum are very much into music. The music section of this site has over 13,000 posts! Many members are ALSO very much into squeezing the most amount of music out of their systems to suit their needs (see the >27,000 posts at Amps and Source Components section).

Call yourself whatever you would like. From the information that you've posted, you seem to share a lot of the same interests that many folks here share... not only an interest in music, but an interest is gaining additional knowledge and understanding about music and about how music is reproduced, of how to acheive the best auido results to suit your needs.

Most regular posters at this site also have similar personality traits... most are into gear, into gadgets, and have a somewhat obsessive/compulsive nature. People who have these interests and traits together are frequently labelled audiophiles by others who may not necessarily share the same interest and traits. There are no shortage of folks who would be shocked to find out how much money you (or most everyone else at this site) spent on your current rigs. Those folks would likely lable you (or most of the people here) as an "audiophile". Which brings up the original question: Does it matter what they think or what they call you????

To most of the folks at this site, you're a respected colleague who provides entertainment and useful information to this community. Labels don't really matter.

Bruce

 

[TaffyGuy]

hmm, thats all well and good guys but kelly does have a point. however you want to define it, you can't deny that "audiophile" implies some sort of obsession and without that you're just some guy with too much money and time on his hands.

for me, i'm really into obsession. i've already said this i think. my obsessions are what keep me going. but of course i'd never boast the title audiophile either. for one thing i'm infinitely practical, which is a weakness of mine (i'm not always in the right state of mind to realize if my practical decitions are truely fitting that description) but it's always looming overhead. i'm also fickle as all hell. i want everything, and quickly. if i don't get it, something else catches my attention. in the last 2 years i've bought an alto sax, acoustic guitar, and flute. do i master each before i go onto the next? no. i just want to do everything. i really want a piano, but they aren't very convenient for college life (that whole moving every few months thing) and its a personal goal of mine to be the only left handed fiddler west of the mississippi (not accurate i'm sure, but it has a ring to it, no?) i've done others too. i've been an obsessed computer nerd, but i'm not actually a social deviant, obsessed with some chick, but i'm not getting any... okay you get the point.

all that being said, i dono if kelly can live up the the claim

but maybe he just really liked the RKV sound, and the next time he see's a beautiful see-through chassis componant that is supposed to have killer sound, he'll just shrug it off becuase his stuff is good enough. and thats where the audiophile really breaks down.

yeah?

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

no offense was intended

none was taken at all. And you're right, it's hard to keep this habit up with my income. . . and hi-fi hating parents.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly I only meant that if some people define membership with material purchases

I don't think anyone said that... we all just pointed to your rig as one of MANY pieces of evidence that support your membership

And yes, you can be a 15-year-old with a PCDP and still be an audiophile, IMO. If you love music, and you love to hear it reproduced as accurately as possible (including as accurately as possible within even limited means), then in my mind you're an audiophile. And unlike many people who see the label "audiophile" as some sort of scarlet letter, I think being an audiophile is a good thing. I think it's just the ultra-materialistic, money-is-no-object-I-just-have-to-have-better-than-the-next-guy people and the nut cases who give audiophiles a bad name.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by andrzejpw . . . and hi-fi hating parents.

The way I interpret the fact that most parents (or at least my parents) don't like audiophilia is because (a) it seems pointless, but most of all it I also think that (b) it comes across as selfish and self-indulgent. That's when I feel obligated to sit down and think and really wonder when it's time to stop receiving and begin giving.

I think and personally believe that audiophilia should be a phase; it should be the temporary journey with witch you find your favorite headphone(s), accept their flaws, accept what audiophila has to offer and why it may always plague you if you don't just enjoy the music. You must do what you must to gain the optimal system within your morals and budget so that *you* are happy. If you are not enjoying your music after a long time of searching, then you're most likely simply kidding yourself and should reevaluate why you got into audiophilia in the first place. What was your goal, anyway?

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

The way I interpret the fact that most parents (or at least my parents) don't like audiophilia is because (a) it seems pointless, but most of all it I also think that (b) it comes across as selfish and self-indulgent.

well, you pretty much described my parents.

The ironic thing is, the meta pretty much is the end. I can really ENJOY the music, the equipment isn't getting in the way.

 

[kelly]

So the things other people buy for themselves and enjoy are somehow less self indulgent? I'd question that.

QG
One small point -- you said, in summary: "If you're not enjoying the music after a long time on the audiophile path, something's wrong." I think most of us are enjoying what we have now despite being in the process of upgrade. If I failed to mention it, I thought the Corda HA-1 was truly excellent when I received it. I began enjoying music through it immediately. The opportunity to get better should not imply that what we have now or in the meantime is "bad" necessarily.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly So the things other people buy for themselves and enjoy are somehow less self indulgent? I'd question that.

I should clarify. In Hinsdale, where I go to school (though don't live there) the majority of the everyone is filthy rich and are far more self-indulgent than I could ever be spending money on audio, with the kids driving to school in their own BMW 325i's and Range Rovers. So in that case I would say no. Though in the rest of the world, we audiophiles in school *can* be self indulgent
relative to what other people our age spend on ourselves. I was not really referring to the normal population- you are right about the general population being just as or more self indulgent than the very 'indulging' audiophile. Afterall, most America would call a BMW indulgent; and BMW's are far more than a headphone system- so- yes the *adult* population is *more* indulgent than audiophiles IMO. That is, of course, if the hypothetical audiophile we're discussing doesn't buy himself a BMW too.

Quote:

QG One small point -- you said, in summary: "If you're not enjoying the music after a long time on the audiophile path, something's wrong." I think most of us are enjoying what we have now despite being in the process of upgrade. If I failed to mention it, I thought the Corda HA-1 was truly excellent when I received it. I began enjoying music through it immediately. The opportunity to get better should not imply that what we have now or in the meantime is "bad" necessarily.

Very true, but you're not enjoying it as much as you *could* be are you, being an audiophile? Or will you be happier if you upgrade? I think not. Some (though only the stereotypical, upgrading, critical) audiophiles just see more and more flaws and never see *the* system, impeding enjoyment. If you're not that sort of audiophile, then, of course, you might have no trouble loving the music all the more than if you were not an audiophile. It really, really depends. Semantics again; it really depends on your definiton of audiophile.

The point of the matter is that if being an audiophile means having less fun with what you love most, music, then something must change. Though if audiophila simply enhances the musical experience, then it is all the better. For me, I see audiophilia as constantly hearing the equipment and evaluating it and checking it for flaws in its presentation of the music. That is the 'phase' that I was talking about. When I find the system that I want, I don't really want to have to think about the system on which the music is playing, but rather the venue that I've been transported to as the result of my transparent system that I'm no longer aware of. Though that doesn't mean that I'll fall off the wagon and restart the 'phase' all over again!

 

[kelly]

QG
As usualy, you make excellent points, yet we see things from a little bit of a different perspective.

I was pretty poor as a kid. I won't go into the details but trust me when I say I've known poverty. The kids in my school, even when I moved to Dallas and went to inner city schools, would show up in designer jeans and $150 tennis shoes. They'd have their class rings and their letterman jackets and even the middle class ones seemed to manage to have their cars. I understand that Texas may not be very representative of the world and maybe this kind of wealth is not typical, but I've certainly been surrounded by people who had more money than I had. And, tragically, I still am.

Another point you've touched on is the dichotomy between "enjoying the music" (in the gestalt sense) and "listening to the equipment." I know that my experience is atypical here and I don't mean to speak for anyone else but for me, these are simply not at odds. Often times I am listening to the music, interpretting lyrics, and following basslines all at the same time. I think some people would assume that my listening style is analytical and deconstructionist but I insist that I listen to the whole of the music in addition to and simultaneous to the details of the instruments and the musicians.

The equipment then is simply another layer to this. And, it is, frankly, there whether I wish it to be or not. If I hear an anomoly that is distracting or "wrong", I cannot simply pretend to not hear it just because I'd rather "only listen to the music." It's there in the same way that a dark green line appears on the screen at the theater when a scratched print is running through the projector. Some people get so irritated by the green line that they lose the movie. Some people get so caught up in the movie that they forget about the scratch. I see both. The flaws are irritating but not consuming--they're simply part of a greater landscape.