Are There any audiophiles on this forum ?

[melvin walker]

First what is an audiophile ? High -End Audio The complete Guide defines an audiophile "Attempt at making the hardware disappear , when listening for pleasure or listening critically , constantly changing equipment , listening to the equipment rather than the music."

I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end .
Whether vintage are new .
"

[Luvin Da Blues]

I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end."

And.......

[melvin walker]

And.......

An excellent audio system , a true audiophile !

[JSE]

And.......

Ya had to asked did'nt ya?

[SlumpBuster]

Another cohesive and well thought out question from Melvin!

Its a garbage question if you're going to rely on that garbage definition. In the first part of the definition, an audiophile is trying to "make the equipment disappear." But, in the second part of the definition, the audiophile is "listening to the equipment rather than the music." The definition defeats itself. Also, "constantly changing equipment" doesn't define anything. If that were criteria, then SVI would be the most accomplished audiophile here.

Mel, you jump from what is an "audiophile" to what is "hi-end." The two are not related. Being an audiophile is not dependant on the equipment you own. It is dependant on you level of appreciation. You can be an audiophile with no equipment. If you are going to the free concert series in local parks, you can be an audiophile. If you're doing the rounds of the hi-fi shops on the weekends, you can be an audiophile. Just as you can an oneophile relying on free wine tastings.

[GMichael]

That depends. Do you believe that being an audiophile is dependent on the price a person pays for their audio equipment? I don't see that in your definition, but it appears to be what matters to you.
So, what definition are we going by?

[markw]

What a horrid way to listen to music. That's like focusing in on a tiny imperfection on a beautiful woman's shoulder while making slow, sweet love.

After years of "critical listening" with a specific goal in mind, I'm just pleased as punch that my systems do an excellent job of making the music I listen to at home sound very much like the music I listen to live considering the physical and economic constraints that we mere mortals must abide by.

That was the aforementioned "specific goal" I had in mind. Once that goal has been achieved to one's own satisfaction, what's the point of continuing? You can only go half way into the forest before you start coming out of it.

Apparently, since you swear your 50 year-old JBL's are the epitome of speaker design and the Marantz 7C/9 combo is the ultimate in amplifier design, you can't logically argue this point.

And, as for that "making the hardware disappear" stuff, just leave your equipment on the street or your front porch. Believe me, it''ll disappear.

You might want to try on a new suit. The old one is getting threadbare.

[SlumpBuster]

Slumpy's Sub $350.00 "audiophile" kit: Grado SR-60 headphones ($69), Project Head Box MkII ($129), Cambridge DVD player or the like on Ebay for approx $125.

Anyone care to argue?

[Rich-n-Texas]

What a horrid way to listen to music. That's like focusing in on a tiny imperfection on a beautiful woman's shoulder while making slow, sweet love.

Oh Jeeeeeeeeezzz.

(doing my best to trash this thread)

[Groundbeef]

Oh Jeeeeeeeeezzz.

(doing my best to trash this thread)

It would have to be some kind of imperfection. Like a festering blackhead, or a really hairy mole. That could ruin the mood, no matter how hot she is.

[melvin walker]

That depends. Do you believe that being an audiophile is dependent on the price a person pays for their audio equipment? I don't see that in your definition, but it appears to be what matters to you.
So, what definition are we going by?

A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.

Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.

The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.

[GMichael]

A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.

Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.

The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.

In that case, I reject you as having any kind of clue. I will no longer waste my time with you.
Unless it's to pick on you for being foolish.

[markw]

A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical.

Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.

The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.

I guess it's time for you to sell all that old, outdated, obsolete crap you call a hi-fi and start looking and spending on some new stuff so you can hold on the your cherished title.

And, since you're in a spell-check mood, "I would not be surprise" makes no sense. The tense is wrong. Had you said either "I would not be surprised that an,,," or "It would not surprise me to see that an...".

In either case, your ignorance and lack of class is showing again. After all, how can one claim superiority if one cannot communicate correctly?

[melvin walker]

I guess it's time for you to sell all that old, outdated, obsolete crap you call a hi-fi and start looking and spending on some new stuff so you can hold on the your cherished title.

I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.

[markw]

I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.

Wow. I'm hurt. how can I ever show my face here again.

It's too bad you'll never get to hear my equipment. I've heard your speakers (in other locations, of course) and, for my purposes, my speakers beat yours hands down. They are nice but present a sound and image that harks back to the days of Eisehnower and Magnavox consoles. Not that that's bad, mind you, but there have been tremendous improvements since then. If all I wanted was a trip down memory lane then they would be perfect but, sorry, that's not for me. I don't have the toom to store antiques. So, enjoy your big, impressive boxes. a perfect, bloated, icon of days past, just like you.

It's too bad you can't appreciate a svelte planar. Obviously, you havent listened to music in the past fifty years either.

("Is your interest grammar are audio" Marvin, you ignorant, no stupid, putz. Don't you ever learn?)

[Groundbeef]

I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.

Wow, how far we have come. What's really striking to me is that my Grandfather owned a pair of speakers just like the ones you own Mr. Walker. I just don't remeber him being a pr!ck about it to others who didn't have the same gear. If you relish your old gear, thats great. I applaud you for your wise purchse 30 YEARS ago.

You remind me of the one drunk who hangs out at the end of the bar. All he can do is be a loudmouthed ass, and remind people of what a "star" he was in High School. Relive the glory days old man, and keep telling yourself that it was the best it will ever be. But I'm not trapped in your delusional ramblings, and neither are the rest of us. As my father in law says "I could complain, but no one would care. So why complain. If your not happy, work to change it. If not, shut the hell up!"

You need to go to www.audiowannabesfortotallosers.com I think you would fit right in. You might even get to be president some day.

[basite]

A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.

Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.

The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.

so you say the one owning all the exotic audio gears 'just because he can' is more of an audiophile than another person, who owns slightly less exotic gear but actually cares about it, and tries to get the most out of it?

let me give you the example with cars: there are people owning all the rolls royces and ferraris, just because they can afford them, but there are also people looking for a really good car and cannot afford the ferrari or the rolls, they settle with a B&W 5 series, but does that mean they like the car less than the one with the rolls? NO. all it says is that the person with the rolls has more money.

same with audio. most people cannot afford to have all the exotic gears, but does that mean that they don't care about it? and does it mean that the person with the best equipment ever made cares about it? no.

sure equipment has something to do with being an audiophile, and sure an audiophile is always looking for 'the best', which, by the way, hasn't been defined yet. I for example would hate the sound of your JBL's, just because I don't like the JBL sound, and especially not the horn sound.

no.
Being an audiophile involves loving your gears as much as the music. It takes care, time, and love.

you can be an audiophile if you haven't upgraded your equipment for the past 20 years. Because there is always something you can improve in your system without having to upgrade. Also, there is always better, it just never ends, so following your definition (well, not yours, but one from some big guide to things that aren't even defined, and can't be defined), no one on this entire planet is an audiophile.

that said, evaluate my system as much as you want, and say whatever you want, but all I know is that I love my system, I care about it, just as I love the music. That, In my opinion, makes me and other people an audiophile.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[melvin walker]

so you say the one owning all the exotic audio gears 'just because he can' is more of an audiophile than another person, who owns slightly less exotic gear but actually cares about it, and tries to get the most out of it?

let me give you the example with cars: there are people owning all the rolls royces and ferraris, just because they can afford them, but there are also people looking for a really good car and cannot afford the ferrari or the rolls, they settle with a B&W 5 series, but does that mean they like the car less than the one with the rolls? NO. all it says is that the person with the rolls has more money.

same with audio. most people cannot afford to have all the exotic gears, but does that mean that they don't care about it? and does it mean that the person with the best equipment ever made cares about it? no.

sure equipment has something to do with being an audiophile, and sure an audiophile is always looking for 'the best', which, by the way, hasn't been defined yet. I for example would hate the sound of your JBL's, just because I don't like the JBL sound, and especially not the horn sound.

no.
Being an audiophile involves loving your gears as much as the music. It takes care, time, and love.

you can be an audiophile if you haven't upgraded your equipment for the past 20 years. Because there is always something you can improve in your system without having to upgrade. Also, there is always better, it just never ends, so following your definition (well, not yours, but one from some big guide to things that aren't even defined, and can't be defined), no one on this entire planet is an audiophile.

that said, evaluate my system as much as you want, and say whatever you want, but all I know is that I love my system, I care about it, just as I love the music. That, In my opinion, makes me and other people an audiophile.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

You love music and you also enjoy your audio system. An audiophile does not necessarily love music ,an audiophile loves music equipment. He spends most of his time changing speakers , amps , cartridges etc. An audiophile is never happy with his system.
I was an audiophile and had several friends who were audiophiles. No one was satisfied with their system. I have been in several car clubs and why do you think they keep improving on high end cars ? First it is 200hp , 300hp, 380hp, 400hp , 500hp, now it is all
the way up to 600hp. Is that enough NO !

I have had in my main system three pairs of speakers , three power amps , three preamps , five tone arms , four TT , three tuners , six cartridges and two tape recorders.
I have audiophiles friends who have made many more changes.
Much like the car hobbyist I was never happy. I have made changes on the Hartsfield ,
When JBL included the 075 tweeter and a Separate crossover to extend the high end.
I was not satisfied with the 075 and replaced it with the 175 DLH.

No you are not an audiophile , you haven's spent enough money ! You haven't made enough changes. I haven't been an audiophile for 30 years.
I moved on to other hobbies. I enjoy discussing hi-fi as I did when I was an audiophile.

[Ajani]

........... An audiophile does not necessarily love music ,an audiophile loves music equipment. He spends most of his time changing speakers , amps , cartridges etc. An audiophile is never happy with his system.......

The sad part is that this definition is probably the most correct one... Audiophilia is essentially a mental condition, a constant state of disatisfaction with one's audio equipment... not about enjoying the music...

One thing I give Melvin credit for.... he's killed any desire I might ever have of becoming an Audiophile....

I'm much happier just being an Audio Enthusiast.....

[basite]

No you are not an audiophile , you haven's spent enough money ! You haven't made enough changes. I haven't been an audiophile for 30 years.
I moved on to other hobbies. I enjoy discussing hi-fi as I did when I was an audiophile.

who are you to tell that.

and do you think €12.000 isn't enough yet? I'm 17 for **** sake, do you think I just won a lottery or so?

let me give you a quick currency conversion, €12000 is 17 781.6 US$ For a 17 year old kid. I'm not even allowed to drive a car yet!


think that isn't enough yet?

I've went through 4 amps, 3 sets of speakers, 2 turntables, lots of cables 3 cartridges, got a cd player, and much more. In 1,5 years. Do you think I haven't upgraded enough?

this year alone I went from a €450 denon to a €4500 Mcintosh, I went from a pc to a decent CD player, I went from stacked advents to €5000 Thiels. IN ONE YEAR.

isn't that enough yet?

And by your stolen definition, I'm not an audiophile. By my own, and many others opinions, I am.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[noddin0ff]

Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?

[markw]

Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?

What or you trying to say?

Yeah, I caught it, too.

[GMichael]

Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?

Yeah, several people have pointed that out. Not sure why he ignores it and keeps using are instead of or. I'm starting to get used to it. Maybe that's his plan.

How many lights do you see?
Four.
No, there are 5. Look again!

[melvin walker]

Yeah, several people have pointed that out. Not sure why he ignores it and keeps using are instead of or. I'm starting to get used to it. Maybe that's his plan.

How many lights do you see?
Four.
No, there are 5. Look again!

Is your interest grammar are audio , judging by your audio system it isn't audio.

[GMichael]

Is your interest grammar are audio , judging by your audio system it isn't audio.

Another foolish post by a foolish person. Try again.