Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 71 of 71
  1. #51
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Ditto that !!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani View Post
    The sound quality debate of music server versus CD is not likely to be resolved anytime soon (if ever) as there are persons who claim music servers are clearly superior to CD, others who claim CDs are better and some (like me) who have yet to notice a difference between the two...
    I don't hear any sound differences vs. my CDP when using the same DAC. (My external DAC is superior to the CDP's internal DAC.)

    I use a semi-dedicated Vista computer as my server. I have unfrequent "glitches" -- mostly burps and studders which don't effect the basic sound of playback. I attribute these glitches to the OS' background operations, to sound drivers (e.g. WASAPI vs. the M-Audio ASIO), or maybe to the external eSATA drive that I'm using. Maybe a true, purpose-made music server would elimniate these problems, or maybe not. In any case they are infrequent and minor in the big picture.

  2. #52
    Forum Regular dwayne.aycock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Riverview, FL
    Posts
    58
    I think being an audiophile is a fraternity of music lovers. No matter the channels, no matter the format. It is the persuit of perfection in the audio and video domain. It is not the cost of equipment, but rather a series of techniques and procedures aimed at getting the best sound. It takes into account all of the players in the audio path from equipment, ( wires, interconnects, speakers, signal flow and path), and the build quality of those componets. It also takes into account the arrangement and placement of these items in the room in which they are housed. The interactions of the listener with the environment, as well as the items in the listening space (furniture, pictures, walls, floors,). We understand the passion and the persuit of perfection in the things we do. No elitism should be inferred in anything we do. We like what we like and that is all there is to it. Your likes change as you age, and as your funds permit. Pure and simple.

  3. #53
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    6
    never heard of an audiophille in my life... lol i think i might be one haha

  4. #54
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Its quite simple:

    1. Is your name RGA?

    Yes= You are an audiophile
    No = You are not an audiophile

    2. Do you own AudioNote speakers?

    Yes= We are unsure, proceed to question 1
    No = You are not an audiophile

    A real simple test to find out. Problem solved. Thanks.. i am here all week
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  5. #55
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lexington SC - Go Gamecocks
    Posts
    9
    "Who or what is a Audiophile? " I don't know, I just like listening to music.

  6. #56
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian View Post
    Its quite simple:

    1. Is your name RGA?

    Yes= You are an audiophile
    No = You are not an audiophile

    2. Do you own AudioNote speakers?

    Yes= We are unsure, proceed to question 1
    No = You are not an audiophile

    A real simple test to find out. Problem solved. Thanks.. i am here all week
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  7. #57
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    I am not an audiophile (or a videophile). Please do not call me names like that. I just like music and HT.
    The fact that I spend each and every minute of every day thinking of ways to improve my system(s) means nothing. Please do not look behind the curtain.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  8. #58
    Forum Regular Chas Underhay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    151
    I would define an "audiophile" as somebody who is more interested in the reproduction equipment than the actual music they play through it.

    Personally, I would rather hear good music on the kitchen radio than test records on the worlds best sound system.

    I'd like to think that most of us on this forum like music so much that we're prepared to go a lot further than the casual listener to maximise our enjoyment.

    If someone's equipment is worth more that their music collection; they are probably an audiophile.

    Cheers

    Chas

  9. #59
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Chas Underhay View Post
    I would define an "audiophile" as somebody who is more interested in the reproduction equipment than the actual music they play through it.

    Personally, I would rather hear good music on the kitchen radio than test records on the worlds best sound system.

    I'd like to think that most of us on this forum like music so much that we're prepared to go a lot further than the casual listener to maximise our enjoyment.

    If someone's equipment is worth more that their music collection; they are probably an audiophile.

    Cheers

    Chas
    Chas, good to hear from you. But I think you definition of "audiophile" is a bit extreme.

    I mean that in the sense that a person can be a genuine music lover -- one who does put music first -- yet an audiophile at the same time. This sort of person is one whose appreciation of music is so enhanced by good sound that he/she is willing to devote a reasonable portion of resources to reproduction equipment.

    The rule of thumb that a music lover's music collection ought to cost more that his/her equipment isn't perfect. There can be circumstance where it might not apply. E.g. a younger person or new music lover who just who hasn't yet compliled a huge music collection, or anyone whose area of musical interest is relatively narrow or focused on carefully selected "hits" or best examples.

  10. #60
    Forum Regular Chas Underhay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    151
    Hi Feanor

    Hoping you and yours are well but we're only talking about a percieved definition of a word here.

    It seems that about half the people on this thread consider themselves as audiophiles whilst the other half deny it emphatically.

    I think you are around the same age as me and if so, I bet when you got your first few records; you were playing then on your Mum and Dad's eguipment (probably a radiogram in those days). After a while you probably aquired a record player that you could use in your bedroom and even by then, your records may well have been worth more than your new "Dansette" or whatever you had.

    If you were like me, you carried on aquiring records - presents and paper round money. However, once you started work, you could afford a bit better kit to play them on and boy did that Garrard SP25 sound better than the Dansette which in turn lead to the slippery slope of the Hi Fi hobby.

    Things are a lot different today a youngster would would be more likely to have an I Pod but even someone starting out with CDs could buy a very cheap system that would sound far better than our old Dansettes, probably still considerably better than our first Hi Fi systems. For most people, that cheap CD system would be as good as they ever want and many will amass hundreds if not thousands of CDs.

    I don't know about you but I don't recall the term "audiophile" from those days and definately not "high end audio" (another IMO prestentious term). E.g. If you can pay 5,000 or 6,000 for a cartridge; that means that a medium range cartridge costs 2,000 to 3,000 which in turn means that my Ortofon Kontrapunkt b, which only cost me about 750, is cheap crap!

    So, what I'm saying is that most of us got where we are by a long progression of recorded music aquisition and equipment upgrades. I said on another vinyl vs. CD thread that if I didn't already have about 2000 LPs, I wouldn't go out now and buy my record player.

    I used to do quite a lot of photography when I was younger but I was never to hung up on camera bodies. I was glad that other people were because I could buy an immaculate two or three year old camera for a fraction of its original price then work it into the ground.

  11. #61
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Indeed, Chas, I go back in audio a dozen years before CD came along. However I was already in my early 20s; curiously I didn't have much interest in music as a teenage and a factor might have been that my mother, (single parent), didn't have any sort of phonograph.

    I never owned more that 300-350 LPs and for 20 years only 250 or so CDs, (for a couple of reasons). Today I have wittled my LP collection down to fewer than 200 that I seldom listen to. I so have ~1200 CDs.

    I wouldn't be worth my while to by a new phono kit today. As far as I'm concerned, any superiority of LP over CD today is purely a matter of preference. The best sound I've heard is from HI-rez downloads, and if I were to upgrade anything it would be my SACD player. Otherwise my stereo kit today is not only by far the best but also the cheapest that I've owned in decades.

  12. #62
    Forum Regular Chas Underhay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    151
    Hi Feanor

    Mothers who found themselves single, for whatever reason, in those days seemed to do a far better job than single mothers generally do now.

    Your computer based system seems good and I guess we'll all go down that route eventualy.

    I see from your classical music list that you have wide ranging tastes. Although I like many kinds of music, I do like earlier music through untill Handel died in 1759. I particularly like renasaince period choral music like Byrd, Allegri, Palastrina, Tallis etc. I've also got Voice of the Blood by Hildegarde Von Bingen and a few other bits of very early music - interesting stuff.

    As I said, if I didn't have an vinyl, I wouldn't start now but if I still had 200 that I liked; I'd want to be able to hear them on somethiong or other!

    Cheers and all the best

    Chas

  13. #63
    Forum Regular Mike Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    722
    Feanor,

    I see you like the Class D + Maggies combo. Great choice.

    I am still loving the ICEPower Class D amps in combination with my 3.6Rs. I have them actively bi-amped, with 1000 watts on the bass panels, and 500 watts on the mid+ribbon.

    There's something about the combination of Class D and Maggies that really works. I'm sure part of it is the gobs of wattage that Maggies need to really bloom, but there's more to it, I'm sure.

    Thinking about going tri-amp next, splitting out the mid panels from the ribbons. Wondering what kind of amp would be best for the ribbons.
    There's an audiophile born every minute. Congratulations; you're right on time.

    FREE RADICAL RADIO: Hours of free, radical MP3s!

  14. #64
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Anderson View Post
    Feanor,

    I see you like the Class D + Maggies combo. Great choice.

    I am still loving the ICEPower Class D amps in combination with my 3.6Rs. I have them actively bi-amped, with 1000 watts on the bass panels, and 500 watts on the mid+ribbon.

    There's something about the combination of Class D and Maggies that really works. I'm sure part of it is the gobs of wattage that Maggies need to really bloom, but there's more to it, I'm sure.

    Thinking about going tri-amp next, splitting out the mid panels from the ribbons. Wondering what kind of amp would be best for the ribbons.
    My Class D Audio amp is the best amp I've owned. Pundits over at AA have assured me that my previous Monarchy SM-70 Pros are better but no so, at least not to my taste. I like the transparency and the neutral presentation that delivers truer instrument timbre IMO.

    The model SDS-258 I have delivers 300+ wpc at 4 ohms which I feel is enough with the 1.6 driven at the very moderate volumes at which I listen. But then I don't doubt the ICEpower bi-amped 3.6's are awsome.

  15. #65
    Forum Regular Mike Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    722
    I just ordered a pair of the Bel Canto REF500M monoblocks to replace the old Acoustic Reality eaR 501 monos on my mids/ribbons.

    Looking forward to hearing the difference. The latter use the older 500ASP modules, while the former use the later, 4rd gen ASX2 modules, supposedly with better specs.

    Will report back.
    There's an audiophile born every minute. Congratulations; you're right on time.

    FREE RADICAL RADIO: Hours of free, radical MP3s!

  16. #66
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Anderson View Post
    I just ordered a pair of the Bel Canto REF500M monoblocks to replace the old Acoustic Reality eaR 501 monos on my mids/ribbons.

    Looking forward to hearing the difference. The latter use the older 500ASP modules, while the former use the later, 4rd gen ASX2 modules, supposedly with better specs.

    Will report back.
    We'll look forward to that, Mike. There are wearisome numbers of tube fanatics and class D naysayers around here.

    Do keep in touch.

  17. #67
    Stereo value > car value texlle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible View Post
    According to Wikipedia an audiophile is a hobbyist who seeks high quality audio reproduction via the use of specialized high end audio electronics. This explanation makes no distinction between a two channel system, or a multi-channel system, yet we always associated audiophiles with two channel system guys. Why is that?
    Tradition? The term audiophile (and 2-channel) has been around longer than the home theatre and multi-channel configuration, both multi speaker systems, technically. Not to mention HT and 2-channel is the classic rivalry, so 2-channel guys own rights to the term, out of precedent.

    Of course this raises the question, what do you call a HT enthusiast? I believe your staunch 2-channel fan in tune with this line of rationale would say, "just an enthusiast".

    Seriously speaking though, multi-channel listeners are often grouped in with the home theatre crowd, which involves video equipment. I will admit, I don't know a lot of multi-channel audiophiles. It's usually either 2 speakers for music or many speakers for tv/movies. That's how most people that I know prefer their AV applications. Audiophile doesn't exactly capture the video aspect. I would honestly consider 2-channel and multichannel enthusiasts "audiophiles" as long as we're talking strictly audio equipment.

    If we're not considering the public opinion that so closely lumps together HT with multi-channel audio, I'm just going to stick with a short simple reply...blame tradition.
    Dynaudio Audience 42
    Conrad-Johnson PV14
    Sonographe SA-250
    Music Hall CD 25.2
    Musical Fidelity V3 series- X-LPS phono preamp, X-DAC, X-PSU
    Rega RP1 w/ performance pack
    Pure i-20 iPod dock
    -----------------------------
    B&W DM603s2- B&W LCR60s3- B&W DM302
    Velodyne CT-120 12" sub
    Rotel RSX-1055
    Arcam CD73T
    Samsung LN46C630 46" LCD
    Denon DBP-1611 bluray
    -----------------------------
    KEF K120- Jolida JD202a- Cambridge Audio D300 cdp- T500 tuner

    Photo gallery

  18. #68
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    11
    Someone's who very concerned about sound

  19. #69
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    10
    a person who is especially interested in high-fidelity sound reproduction.

  20. #70
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Orange, CA
    Posts
    552
    An audiophile is someone who can afford to be an audiophile...if you can't afford to be an audiophile, you're an audio enthusiast.

  21. #71
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    125
    For me just being part of this community qualifies oneself as an audiophile - being interested in audio reproduction or asking for comments to improve the sound of your system or needing opinions when upgrading are all serious symptoms of this lovely hobby. Then of course there are various levels of audiophilitis ranging from the mild ( buying decent oxygen free speaker wires, no, the cables itch has not set in yet ) to the terminal phase where the rule of diminished returns is the cancer without a cure.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •