Latest Thread Images

You know you're an audiophile when...
Status
Not open for further replies.
Feb 23, 2012 at 5:38 PM Post #2,071 of 6,356
+1 
beerchug.gif

 
Quote:
derbigpr said:
When you get new headphones, but don't listen to them. Instead you put them in a drawer and let them burn in while you're reading reviews on the same headphones to find out what they sound like.
Click to expand...



 
 
Feb 23, 2012 at 5:43 PM Post #2,072 of 6,356
I'll have to say that for the price point you really cant go wrong... I had people listen to them all the time through the Valhalla and were blown away. Granted they weren't all hi-fi enthusiasts but they enjoyed them nonetheless...
 
I do love that quote! 
beerchug.gif

 
Quote:
mikiphile said:
So, you had no problem driving your K702 to their FULL potential with the valhalla? I intend to drive my 62 ohm K701 with it. Despite what the whole Head-fi says, I absolutely love them. They thrash everything in and above their price range. Maybe not a true High end reference, but certainly very good quality.
 
PS. Your signature "the Churchill quote" is one of my favourite. RESPECT! 
wink.gif
Click to expand...



 
 
Feb 24, 2012 at 3:02 AM Post #2,073 of 6,356
Quote:
navyblue said:
Audiophile and EQ, really?
Click to expand...

When distorted bass is enough to to ruin a party for you thus you equalize the the speakers...
 
 
 
Feb 24, 2012 at 5:26 AM Post #2,075 of 6,356
IMO using EQ (especially software based ones) is like colourizing a classic movie. It adds flavour, some people prefer it, but at the end of the day it is artificially altering a piece of art. 
 

 
Quote:
tilpo said:
I personally think a true audiophile only cares about getting the best sound possible. Only audiophools and purists are afraid of things such as replaygain and equalization.
Click to expand...



 
 
Feb 24, 2012 at 11:37 PM Post #2,077 of 6,356


Quote:
saintkeat said:
You know you're an audiophile when you congregate in a place like this and argue about **** like that ^
Click to expand...



Finally something true. 
smily_headphones1.gif

 
Judging from the comment here it seemed that a lot of people here seemed to think that the majority of the head-fi world is representative of the larger audiophile world. Stuffs like iPods, EQ, the whole idea of headphones, or even using computer as transport (depending on the crowds you talk to), try bringing them up at other mainstream audio forums.
biggrin.gif

 
Feb 25, 2012 at 12:01 AM Post #2,079 of 6,356
anyone here interested in the history of sound?  you know it has a history, an evolution, and we are in a current state of it. music hasn't always sounded like this you know. before the first phonograph all they had was acoustic instruments played live in various rooms. and so the room was really the biggest factor in how music sounded. neandertahls beating rocks on a dirt ground has quite a different sound than victorians playing the lute in an old wooden church. or mid century tube driven gear or tape, vinyl, then came the digital age. our only hope is that things do in fact come 'round full circle. Or do most of you feel that it is a progression from poor sound to better and things go upward in a straight line like a rocket?  is sound 'better' now than in 1971? is it more natural? or just more. more dynamics, more detail, more bass, more treble, less midrange..........midrange is the achiles heel for sound reproduction, it's always neglected by the pseudo audiophile because to achieve natural midrange, all the other so called desirable audiophile qualites must necessarily be sacrificed. you can't have your cake and eat it too. nature always makes sure things are in balance. once you have artificial dynamic levels, you can't have natural dynamic levels. once you have artificial bass, you can't have natural bass. once you have supra detail, you can't have natural detail levels...........and now we are back to acoustic 'real' reproduction of music. What else can be the reference for natural sound than live music?   'music' 'made' by dj's sampling real musicians?  I mean even acoustic guitars sound different than they did 30 years ago and so natural sound in 'the real world' is even different. Acoustic guitars made from fast growth trees with thick polyurethane finish, as made today, sound totally different than acoustic guitars made 40 years ago from slow original growth trees that had a thin layer of a natural finish on its top.........when you think about the history and current state of sound, then you know you are an audiophile.  
 
Feb 25, 2012 at 1:03 AM Post #2,082 of 6,356


Quote:
tilpo said:
I personally think a true audiophile only cares about getting the best sound possible. Only audiophools and purists are afraid of things such as replaygain and equalization.
Click to expand...



 That may be your definition - a more generally accepted definition might be that a 'Real McCoy' audiophile is someone chasing a sound that they can never
 achieve, endless frustration is thrown at their current rig - they buy, sell, trade, upgrade - chasing the dragon's tail never ends. Ever.
 
 Not necessarily a trait to be admired either by the way.
 
 
Feb 25, 2012 at 2:49 AM Post #2,085 of 6,356
schof said:
When in public with a good friend, you would rather ignore one another and listen to your music through your headphones than have a conversation... :frowning2:
Click to expand...


At least you mutially agree :p.

Also, is it just me or are people who listen to albums rather than individual tracks extremely rare?
I personally know a mere two people that actually have a well developped taste in music.

Also: you know you are an audiophile when you have the tendency to judge people by what music they listen to and how they listen to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Back
Top