Music lovers

[poppachubby]

I believe it is thought that experienced musicians and music lovers can fill in the gaps in inferior sound reproduction. Isn't it?

What do you mean by fill in the gaps noob? If Hendrix is playing a solo, I want to hear all of it, not a stripped down version, or any version where I must fill in a gap. "Purple Haze, all in noob's brain, lately thiings just don't seem the same..."

[02audionoob]

What do you mean by fill in the gaps noob? If Hendrix is playing a solo, I want to hear all of it, not a stripped down version, or any version where I must fill in a gap. "Purple Haze, all in noob's brain, lately thiings just don't seem the same..."

I don't know the words for this phenomenon, if it truly exists, but I've heard the brain just needs the reminder of the music for the listener to enjoy it. On inferior noisemakers not all the sounds can be clearly heard in the distinct way audio gear can deliver it, but the brain knows what the music sounds like...even if the noisemaker at hand is just a cheap clock-radio.

[poppachubby]

I don't know the words for this phenomenon, if it truly exists, but I've heard the brain just needs the reminder of the music for the listener to enjoy it. On inferior noisemakers not all the sounds can be clearly heard in the distinct way audio gear can deliver it, but the brain knows what the music sounds like...even if the noisemaker at hand is just a cheap clock-radio.

As a musician I can say this could have some basis, however, I want the goods when it comes to my music. It doesn't have to be perfect, but fully audible, as I was intended to hear it.

[Hyfi]

I don't know the words for this phenomenon, if it truly exists, but I've heard the brain just needs the reminder of the music for the listener to enjoy it. On inferior noisemakers not all the sounds can be clearly heard in the distinct way audio gear can deliver it, but the brain knows what the music sounds like...even if the noisemaker at hand is just a cheap clock-radio.

I'm not sure I follow this. Yes if I hear a few notes of a familiar song, I can guess it. Yes if I hear a 128kb MP3 of a song I know, I will recognize it, but, in no way does my brain fill in the missing highs and missing lows and all the missing detail and instrument timber.

This is similar to listening to a good LP side by side with a CD made by BMG of the same recording. My brain does not fill in the missing length of the cymbal crashes that are missing from the CD. My brain does not fill in all the missing feeling and emotion that an analog recording has that most digital recordings lack. The analog wave is not square and does not just drop off like a digital signal normally does.

Yes there are many digital recordings that come close to analog recordings but all in all, minus a little snap crackle pop, an LP on a good rig will always sound better than the same CD on similar gear.

Maybe I only have half a brain but I can clearly hear all the differences that I just mentioned above and although I will know the song, the words, the music, my brain does not fill in the missing data while the crappy sounding version plays. My brain usually tells me "this recording sounds like crap".

[pixelthis]

Good equipment is important because a crap listening session is time you don't get back.
BUT sometimes you cant help it.
Last night I listened to public radio, their nightly jazz show, while at work, on a cheap
"Emerson research" clock radio with a ten cent speaker.
AND IT WAS GREAT.
On my home system it would have been outstanding, on an "audiophile" grade system even better.
I love music, and sure I love gear too.
But gear needs a reason, to love just gear without taking its function into account is kind of soulless don't you think?
MY LOVE OF "GEAR" DERIVES from what it does, the way music comes out of a well built loudspeaker will always thrill me.
But without the lifetime love of music as the drive, not so much maybe.

[02audionoob]

I'm not sure I follow this. Yes if I hear a few notes of a familiar song, I can guess it. Yes if I hear a 128kb MP3 of a song I know, I will recognize it, but, in no way does my brain fill in the missing highs and missing lows and all the missing detail and instrument timber.

This is similar to listening to a good LP side by side with a CD made by BMG of the same recording. My brain does not fill in the missing length of the cymbal crashes that are missing from the CD. My brain does not fill in all the missing feeling and emotion that an analog recording has that most digital recordings lack. The analog wave is not square and does not just drop off like a digital signal normally does.

Yes there are many digital recordings that come close to analog recordings but all in all, minus a little snap crackle pop, an LP on a good rig will always sound better than the same CD on similar gear.

Maybe I only have half a brain but I can clearly hear all the differences that I just mentioned above and although I will know the song, the words, the music, my brain does not fill in the missing data while the crappy sounding version plays. My brain usually tells me "this recording sounds like crap".

I think you're carrying my choice of words too far...overanalyzing it. The theory is that for many people music can be enjoyed with limited detail...even with recordings that sound like crap.

[E-Stat]

On inferior noisemakers not all the sounds can be clearly heard in the distinct way audio gear can deliver it, but the brain knows what the music sounds like...even if the noisemaker at hand is just a cheap clock-radio.

I play back music in my head all the time and can fill in what I know is there even when listening to a system that may not be capable of highlighting that detail. When I run, I have a game of playing back songs in alphabetical order by group. I'll choose something by America, then the Beatles, etc.

rw

[JoeE SP9]

When I was much younger I listened to a plastic table radio playing AM through a 3" speaker. It was all I had and all I knew. I use much better gear now because I can and I know better.
Do I like music any more or any less because I have better gear? I don't think so. I bought the better gear so I could hear the music better. If I changed gear as often as underwear (some do), had multiple systems in the same room (some do), used different speakers for different types of music (some do) or any or all of the above I wouldn't be a music lover. The proper term for that is gadget freak.

BTW: My old plastic table radio sounded better than laptop speakers. If my only option was a laptop I'd at least buy some decent headphones. The speakers in cell phones sound better than those in laptops!
Yes, I don't get it either audio amateur. Some people can drink Budweiser and be satisfied. I don't get that either.

[audio amateur]

Some people can drink Budweiser and be satisfied. I don't get that either.

I know! Crazy isn't it? Or maybe they just don't know any better...

[BallinWithNash]

hey i claim to be a music lover and look at my gear ... am i wrong when i say i am a music lover if i listen to it 24/7 in my car, when im at school, when im home etc...

[audio amateur]

Yes but on the other hand just because you love the equipment doesn't mean you don't love the music.

[3db]

Yes but on the other hand just because you love the equipment doesn't mean you don't love the music.

Agreed but that never was implied.

[EYEdROP]

I think its fun to listen to crappy speakers sometimes. I still listen to classic rock with FM radio in my car. I just enjoy music more with audiophile gear (which is what it is intended for).

There are some low cost consumer grade speakers that sound actually decent if you set them up properly. But most people want aesthetics and comfort first.

[poppachubby]

I think its fun to listen to crappy speakers sometimes. I still listen to classic rock with FM radio in my car. I just enjoy music more with audiophile gear (which is what it is intended for).

There are some low cost consumer grade speakers that sound actually decent if you set them up properly. But most people want aesthetics and comfort first.

I am presently using what many would consider to be "crappy" speakers. My friend built the cabs and put the speakers in. They are solidly built with a 8,5 and a 2. Although I am sure they sound good, it doesn't matter. What does matter is that to ME they sound good.

Fun?? Bet your azz, I'm having fun in spades.

I am not hung up on "audiophile" gear, just gear that gives me enough of a result. Seperation, soundstage and tone is enough for me.

[JoeE SP9]

PC:
While most people walk around singing lyrics, I walk around humming solo's that I like. I wonder how many people know that Moody's Mood is a vocal transcription of James Moody's solo on I'm In The Mood For Love?

[Auricauricle]

Hey, guys: At the risk of repeating a point that may have already been voiced, I'll contend that the terms audiophile and music-lover overlap, but only to a certain degree. There is a point where the audiophile stops tweaking the knobs and enjoys the music for its own sake and when the music-lover gets out his chair and reverie and turns the bass up a notch. Musicians know that sound and its production involves processes that involve both musical and technological prowess. The french horn, as an example of an instrument that involve beautiful music (Mozart's horn concertos, anyone?) and technique (what mouthpiece will be used? How far will the hand be inserted into the horn?). Likewise the armchair enthusiast will be drawn to the music, and as (his) ear becomes more keenly involved he will invariably make adjustments (even it's only volume) to increase his appreciation.

As to what appellation is used, it's a matter of priority. If one is an audiophile, the technology drives the passion; if (he) is a music lover, then the music does. Yet, this distinction, I contend, is arbitrary ("not mutually exclusive"), and, therefore, rather pointless (I reckon). Yeah, I like to twiddle, but I do so because doing so maximizes my enjoyment of the music--which came first, the music? The technolgy? The chicken...?

Shhhhhh....I don't know. I need a beer!

[pixelthis]

Hey, guys: At the risk of repeating a point that may have already been voiced, I'll contend that the terms audiophile and music-lover overlap, but only to a certain degree. There is a point where the audiophile stops tweaking the knobs and enjoys the music for its own sake and when the music-lover gets out his chair and reverie and turns the bass up a notch. Musicians know that sound and its production involves processes that involve both musical and technological prowess. The french horn, as an example of an instrument that involve beautiful music (Mozart's horn concertos, anyone?) and technique (what mouthpiece will be used? How far will the hand be inserted into the horn?). Likewise the armchair enthusiast will be drawn to the music, and as (his) ear becomes more keenly involved he will invariably make adjustments (even it's only volume) to increase his appreciation.

As to what appellation is used, it's a matter of priority. If one is an audiophile, the technology drives the passion; if (he) is a music lover, then the music does. Yet, this distinction, I contend, is arbitrary ("not mutually exclusive"), and, therefore, rather pointless (I reckon). Yeah, I like to twiddle, but I do so because doing so maximizes my enjoyment of the music--which came first, the music? The technolgy? The chicken...?

Shhhhhh....I don't know. I need a beer!

They do overlap.
BECAUSE an "audiophile" is an audio enthusiast that is stone cold
crazy

TALK ABOUT OBSESSIVE compulsive disorder.
Some think that audiophiles are more "gear" driven", but if that is the case then why do they spend buffy and andys college funds on stuff like tubes, 3,000 record players,
etc.
Most of the so called "audiophiles" I have known are totally ignorant of basic electronic
principles.
They deny basic scientific principles while espousing fantasies that a cult leader couldnt
come up with.
Ever hear of those ads' about the "credit fairy"?
And credit fairy "magic dust".
Well, come up with some "audio magic dust" (or equivalent) and you'll be on eazy street in no time. Just be sure to charge enough (thousands) or they won't buy it.

[poppachubby]

They do overlap.
BECAUSE an "audiophile" is an audio enthusiast that is stone cold
crazy

TALK ABOUT OBSESSIVE compulsive disorder.
Some think that audiophiles are more "gear" driven", but if that is the case then why do they spend buffy and andys college funds on stuff like tubes, 3,000 record players,
etc.
Most of the so called "audiophiles" I have known are totally ignorant of basic electronic
principles.
They deny basic scientific principles while espousing fantasies that a cult leader couldnt
come up with.
Ever hear of those ads' about the "credit fairy"?
And credit fairy "magic dust".
Well, come up with some "audio magic dust" (or equivalent) and you'll be on eazy street in no time. Just be sure to charge enough (thousands) or they won't buy it.

I agree, to me an audiophile is someone who must have the best of everything as it comes out. They don't even know what they are chasing in terms of "that sound". An enthusiast considers more than just gear. I see these guys when I'm hangin at my local shop. The city I live in has a large percentage of wealthy people, I'm talkin old money. These guys will drop 10 grand like it's nothin'. It's so ridiculous, it really defies envy...I'm envious of the guy who has found his "sound" in spite of gear.

[JoeE SP9]

Hey, do you two (pixelthis, poppachubby) have some sort of Axe to grind.? Why all the sour grapes concerning "audiophiles" I consider myself a long time audiophile. I have neither large pockets nor am I ignorant of science and engineering. I and everyone else here is well aware that pixelthis thinks everything sounds the same and an AV receiver is good enough for everybody. The fact that he keeps pushing his narrow viewpoint on those who think cables sound different or anything else he doesn't believe is becoming boring. Frankly, pixels diatribes against just about everything are getting to be quite tiresome.

pixel, why do you have a problem with the way other people spend their money? No one is asking you to participate in the purchase of anything. Please let others spend their money the way they want. You manage to turn almost every thread into a personal soapbox where you make snide and nasty comments about anything you don't like. Frankly, I don't like your attitude. You have obviously never gotten over being a cop. Please note, you are not the audio police. So, give it a rest please.

MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS!!!

poppachubby, I'm surprised at you. I had no idea you had hidden hostility toward those who have more than you. Obviously, my definition of an audiophile is very different from yours. My definition of an audiophile is.

A music lover who is willing to spend their own money any way he or she wants in the pursuit of better sound.

My definition leaves no one out. People like pixel who think an AV receiver is sufficient, or people who think Japanese speakers are "the bomb", or, heaven forbid those who think an equalizer is a necessary device are all audiophiles in my book. I have no axe to grind and I'm puzzled why some feel they have some kind of agenda to force on others.

Lighten up you two. It's supposed to be about the music. How each individual enjoys it is their own business.

[poppachubby]

Hey, do you two (pixelthis, poppachubby) have some sort of Axe to grind.? Why all the sour grapes concerning "audiophiles" I consider myself a long time audiophile. I have neither large pockets nor am I ignorant of science and engineering. I and everyone else here is well aware that pixelthis thinks everything sounds the same and an AV receiver is good enough for everybody. The fact that he keeps pushing his narrow viewpoint on those who think cables sound different or anything else he doesn't believe is becoming boring. Frankly, pixels diatribes against just about everything are getting to be quite tiresome.

pixel, why do you have a problem with the way other people spend their money? No one is asking you to participate in the purchase of anything. Please let others spend their money the way they want. You manage to turn almost every thread into a personal soapbox where you make snide and nasty comments about anything you don't like. Frankly, I don't like your attitude. You have obviously never gotten over being a cop. Please note, you are not the audio police. So, give it a rest please.

MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS!!!

poppachubby, I'm surprised at you. I had no idea you had hidden hostility toward those who have more than you. Obviously, my definition of an audiophile is very different from yours. My definition of an audiophile is.

A music lover who is willing to spend their own money any way he or she wants in the pursuit of better sound.

My definition leaves no one out. People like pixel who think an AV receiver is sufficient, or people who think Japanese speakers are "the bomb", or, heaven forbid those who think an equalizer is a necessary device are all audiophiles in my book. I have no axe to grind and I'm puzzled why some feel they have some kind of agenda to force on others.

Lighten up you two. It's supposed to be about the music. How each individual enjoys it is their own business.

Whoooaaaaaaaa JOE!! Hey man, I have no axe to grind. No bitterness or hostility either. I was trying to convey my own categorization of audiophile, audio enthusiast and casual listener. I suppose I didn't consider offending anyone who values themselves as an audiophile. So I would like to apologize, my intention was not to ostricize or offend.

Webster's has this to say:
Main Entry: au·dio·phile
Pronunciation: \ˈȯ-dē-ō-ˌfī(-ə)l\
Function: noun
Date: 1951
: a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction

Simple enough I suppose. I just think as audio has progressed to the insane levels it exists at now, "audiophile" has a bit of a stigma attached to it. With the meager gear I posess, I don't consider myself an audiophile. To me the definition has always gone hand in hand with the gear...my own personal definition puts audiophile as someone forever changing gear like underwear.

I suppose I should find a new classification...

[Hyfi]

Hey, do you two (pixelthis, poppachubby) have some sort of Axe to grind.? Why all the sour grapes concerning "audiophiles" I consider myself a long time audiophile. I have neither large pockets nor am I ignorant of science and engineering. I and everyone else here is well aware that pixelthis thinks everything sounds the same and an AV receiver is good enough for everybody. The fact that he keeps pushing his narrow viewpoint on those who think cables sound different or anything else he doesn't believe is becoming boring. Frankly, pixels diatribes against just about everything are getting to be quite tiresome.

pixel, why do you have a problem with the way other people spend their money? No one is asking you to participate in the purchase of anything. Please let others spend their money the way they want. You manage to turn almost every thread into a personal soapbox where you make snide and nasty comments about anything you don't like. Frankly, I don't like your attitude. You have obviously never gotten over being a cop. Please note, you are not the audio police. So, give it a rest please.

MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS!!!

poppachubby, I'm surprised at you. I had no idea you had hidden hostility toward those who have more than you. Obviously, my definition of an audiophile is very different from yours. My definition of an audiophile is.

A music lover who is willing to spend their own money any way he or she wants in the pursuit of better sound.

My definition leaves no one out. People like pixel who think an AV receiver is sufficient, or people who think Japanese speakers are "the bomb", or, heaven forbid those who think an equalizer is a necessary device are all audiophiles in my book. I have no axe to grind and I'm puzzled why some feel they have some kind of agenda to force on others.

Lighten up you two. It's supposed to be about the music. How each individual enjoys it is their own business.

You are right, this post has digressed just a bit. Your comments on Pix are spot on! Although you stated that he criticized on how people spend their own money, he recently criticized me for owning and still using VHS and Beta machines and NOT spending my money.

Although I stated earlier that I am a Gear Snob, I in no way have the money to buy all the latest and greatest. That does not mean that I am not enthusiastic about it as the definition states. I dealt with Soundex from the time I got my first income tax check in 1978. I bought an Onkyo Receiver and Tape deck with Infinity speakers. I think I spent about $400 but can't remember. While in the store and on many occasions, people with money out the ass would come in, but 10k worth of gear and then in two weeks, trade it in for something else and take a loss. Some of these people I would not consider Audiophiles but more Manic people with more money than they need and not knowing how to be satisfied with anything.

My entry into music was due to having an older brother who used to build Heathkits, Dynaco, and Hafler gear on the kitchen table when I was a little tike. He and a second brother would use all these items. My very first stereo was a Heathkit receiver my brother built. I saved my money and after getting married bought my first separates, Hafler 9180 amp and 945 pre-tuner and a set of Mirage floorstanders. I was later able to afford, after saving, a $550 tube preamp by Sound Valves and later a Stratos amp. Then I saves for a few years to buy my Dynaudio 82s.

Over the years I would go to Soundex and listen to all the mega buck systems, drooling and appreciating what they can do. I also figured out early on, you can get almost the same sound from 10k worth of gear as 100k worth. The people who buy the latter do so because they can afford to and not because it sounds 10x better, because it doesn't.

The gear in my signature I lucked into and have a total of $700 invested in the VAC, Counterpoint, Clearfields, Synergistic. If I would have had to pay full price or half price even, I would not own the gear at all. The VAC is real nice but in no way 10x better than the Sound Valves pre.

So with all that rambling, you can be an Audiophile and not even own a system. All you need be is enthusiastic along with the appreciation of the gear and the sound it produces.

[E-Stat]

I'm puzzled why some feel they have some kind of agenda to force on others.

Because you're just a fool who chooses to "waist" his money. ;^)

rw

[pixelthis]

Hey, do you two (pixelthis, poppachubby) have some sort of Axe to grind.? Why all the sour grapes concerning "audiophiles" I consider myself a long time audiophile. I have neither large pockets nor am I ignorant of science and engineering. I and everyone else here is well aware that pixelthis thinks everything sounds the same and an AV receiver is good enough for everybody. The fact that he keeps pushing his narrow viewpoint on those who think cables sound different or anything else he doesn't believe is becoming boring. Frankly, pixels diatribes against just about everything are getting to be quite tiresome.

pixel, why do you have a problem with the way other people spend their money? No one is asking you to participate in the purchase of anything. Please let others spend their money the way they want. You manage to turn almost every thread into a personal soapbox where you make snide and nasty comments about anything you don't like. Frankly, I don't like your attitude. You have obviously never gotten over being a cop. Please note, you are not the audio police. So, give it a rest please.

MIND YOUR OWN DAMN BUSINESS!!!

poppachubby, I'm surprised at you. I had no idea you had hidden hostility toward those who have more than you. Obviously, my definition of an audiophile is very different from yours. My definition of an audiophile is.

A music lover who is willing to spend their own money any way he or she wants in the pursuit of better sound.

My definition leaves no one out. People like pixel who think an AV receiver is sufficient, or people who think Japanese speakers are "the bomb", or, heaven forbid those who think an equalizer is a necessary device are all audiophiles in my book. I have no axe to grind and I'm puzzled why some feel they have some kind of agenda to force on others.

Lighten up you two. It's supposed to be about the music. How each individual enjoys it is their own business.

WHAT "hostility"?
Like on DRAGNET, just stating the facts.
As a matter of fact I have audiophile pretensions my own self.
Doesnt mean that audiophiles arent crazy.
CURRENTLY debating deepsixing the ol HT and going back to my true love,
two channel audio(not enough room for both), and my HT is rather nice.
Plays music nicely, but when I NOTICED THAT everything I did was geared towards
audio, I STARTED the long trek back across the desert.
I mean, really, who needs a state of the art HT to watch the crappolla they come out with these days?.

[02audionoob]

I would definitely not consider myself a connoisseur of audio. I'm not in it to judge the gear...just to enjoy it.

[Auricauricle]

Clearly there are plenty o' fools out there who spend ass loads of cash for the "next big thing" in bells, whistles, lights and "the machine that goes 'Bing!'". There is no reason to mention such proclivities in this forum; I like to think everyone here (regulars especially) are well beyond such facile dunderheadedness....(well, mabe...).

Anyway, I will say that my own enanorment to audio thingies was kindled by the desire to get as much out of the medium as I possibly could. Once I started with cleaning my LP's to squeaky and sparkly perfection, it was only a matter of time before I embarked on the Tweak Road to Audio Hell. As I've grown older and poorer, I have cut back on my requirements to own the best and the brightest. Right now, I use some rather archaeic Kenwood gear, and am quite happy. Do I drool whenever I see a beautiful piece? Sheet yeah, but I don't lose too much sleep over it (thanks to Beer and Ambien),

I think this is where most of us are: We buy what we buy primarily because it makes the music sound better, lets us extract more from the medium than our Close-n-Plays ever could. Bells and whistles and pinging things are part of the fun, sure, but it boils down to music.

Still, if I had a choice to spending an evening with Roseanne Barr or Cameron Diaz there'd be no contest.

I'd spend it with Bettie Paige!