Ripper2860
Headphoneus Supremus
Both.Does that mean you're classless? Or is that priceless? Always difficult to tell.
Schiit Happened: The Story of the World's Most Improbable Start-Up
- Thread starter Jason Stoddard
- Start date
-
- Tags
- schiit audio schiit-audio
bifcake
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2002
- Posts
- 2,133
- Likes
- 761
No, it's saying that one has nothing to do with the other, just like owning a Hasselblad has nothing to do with producing or appreciating photographic art.That's a bit like saying one with a Hasselblad camera cannot truly appreciate photographic art. One can seek to own high quality equipment and still appreciate their preferred art, whether it be photography or music. I know a few artists and they are as anal as most audiophiles -- if not more!
bifcake
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2002
- Posts
- 2,133
- Likes
- 761
People spend money on bling of all types. There is no value in bling. It's just... bling.It's funny how the focus is always on price when discussing the high-end. It is not for the vast majority of audio lovers, it is for a very few who find value in that level of product/spending and exclusivity... it's like buying a Bentley. It's not for most people, nor is it intended to be....
That's why companies like Schiit exist: to make high quality products that ARE affordable for most people.
Ableza
Headphoneus Supremus
If someone finds value in bling, then it is valuable to them. Stop judging other's choices.
Roy G. Biv
Headphoneus Supremus
Clothes are bling. Cars are bling. Houses are bling. Stereos are bling. Wives are bling (sorry, Mrs. Biv bling)
Last edited:
Ripper2860
Headphoneus Supremus
If you had originally stated it as you stated it in the above quote then I would not have replied. You may have intended to communicate that, but you didn't exactly say that. In the below quote you made a blanket statement saying audiophiles do not listen to music. I assume by AUDIOPHILES you are referring to those that appreciate the technology that creates the "sounds emanating". My response insinuates that it makes about as much sense as saying photographers seeking out and owning high quality cameras do not appreciate good photographs.
I will agree that SOME audiophiles are not truly music lovers, but I and many here consider themselves to be both audiophiles and music listeners / lovers. I tend to dislike blanket statements applied to groups of people and therefore chose to disagree by citing an example.
BTW -- I did checkout your abstract photography and it is quite good.
Last edited:
roadcykler
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Posts
- 1,239
- Likes
- 724
Some might say that level of "collecting" is just organized hoarding. Like the vintage guys with 7 receivers or 10 turntables or speakers stacked on speakers because they have no more room.
bcowen
Headphoneus Supremus
Yup. Jimmy Thackery is another fave...especially this collection of live recordings.
33na3rd
500+ Head-Fier
Thank you for the Elma pix/fix!After I sold the Elac, Elma has been doubling as a subwoofer.
She also loves carrying her toys everywhere.
A different audio forum is debating what is “A reference DAC” and you can predict the accusations and recriminations as well as if you went there and read them.
I present A Modest (DAC) Proposal: I nominate the Schiit Modi as the Official Reference DAC for purposes of comparison. I know this sounds high handed. I know that it sounds like something that could never be agreed upon. Hear my thought process:
First, I will divide the internet into three groups: Group 1 says that “ALL PROPERLY DESIGNED DACS SOUND THE SAME!” I am sorry, they really do shout. Group 2 says that “Low priced DACs are good enough.” It is obvious that groups 1 and 2 cannot possibly object to the choice of the Schiit Modi as the universal reference DAC.
This brings us to Group 3. Group three thinks that DACs sound different. I will admit to having one foot in Group 2 and another in Group 3. Group 3 contains people who really care a lot and who often spend a lot of money on their preferred DAC. But they all find numerous and important differences between their expensive DACs. None of them could possibly be “The Reference.”
But many in Group 3 say, “The Modi is a good DAC” or, “The Modi is a good DAC for the money.” No one ever accuses the Modi of being too “whatever.” They say that their $500 or $2,000 or $4,000 DAC sounds better than the Modi. They usually say it sounds a lot better. I believe them. But all those expensive DACs also sound different from each other. So I propose that all DACs be referenced to the Schiit Modi. “This $6,000 DAC sounds more _______ than the Modi, and has less ______.” Anyone who can afford a $5,000 DAC can buy a Modi, out of pocket change, and keep it around for comparison. Anyone whose main DAC cost $500 should have a Modi as a backup, or in their garage.
Think of all the standardization this would add to all discussions of DACs. If you tell me that the Yupiter Zeos4 DAC makes Lana Thalman sound like she is “singing right in the room” I can only look at my empty room and wish. But if you tell me that it made her sound “darker and more alive” than the Schiit Modi I can play her through the Modi and just imagine her – darker and more alive. We can achieve peace in our time!
I present A Modest (DAC) Proposal: I nominate the Schiit Modi as the Official Reference DAC for purposes of comparison. I know this sounds high handed. I know that it sounds like something that could never be agreed upon. Hear my thought process:
First, I will divide the internet into three groups: Group 1 says that “ALL PROPERLY DESIGNED DACS SOUND THE SAME!” I am sorry, they really do shout. Group 2 says that “Low priced DACs are good enough.” It is obvious that groups 1 and 2 cannot possibly object to the choice of the Schiit Modi as the universal reference DAC.
This brings us to Group 3. Group three thinks that DACs sound different. I will admit to having one foot in Group 2 and another in Group 3. Group 3 contains people who really care a lot and who often spend a lot of money on their preferred DAC. But they all find numerous and important differences between their expensive DACs. None of them could possibly be “The Reference.”
But many in Group 3 say, “The Modi is a good DAC” or, “The Modi is a good DAC for the money.” No one ever accuses the Modi of being too “whatever.” They say that their $500 or $2,000 or $4,000 DAC sounds better than the Modi. They usually say it sounds a lot better. I believe them. But all those expensive DACs also sound different from each other. So I propose that all DACs be referenced to the Schiit Modi. “This $6,000 DAC sounds more _______ than the Modi, and has less ______.” Anyone who can afford a $5,000 DAC can buy a Modi, out of pocket change, and keep it around for comparison. Anyone whose main DAC cost $500 should have a Modi as a backup, or in their garage.
Think of all the standardization this would add to all discussions of DACs. If you tell me that the Yupiter Zeos4 DAC makes Lana Thalman sound like she is “singing right in the room” I can only look at my empty room and wish. But if you tell me that it made her sound “darker and more alive” than the Schiit Modi I can play her through the Modi and just imagine her – darker and more alive. We can achieve peace in our time!
Last edited:
A Jedi
500+ Head-Fier
You know those 3 groups of people you were talking about that argue over DACs? Those same 3 groups will argue vehemently about which DAC to use a reference.
Roy G. Biv
Headphoneus Supremus
Jimmy Thackery is a favorite. I'm a CD short of having his entire collection.Yup. Jimmy Thackery is another fave...especially this collection of live recordings.
Sonny Landreth. Eric Johnson. Tab Benoit. Coco Montoya. Kenny Neal. Eric Gales. Junior Brown. Matt Schofield. Doyle Bramhall II. Marcus King. Warren Haynes (including Gov't Mule). Derek Trucks. Michael Burks (RIP). Larry McCray. Joe Louis Walker. David Grissom.
I could go on. Lots of talent out there!
Last edited:
corndog71
500+ Head-Fier
Why bother with a Modi when the dac in your phone works just fine?
