The ultimate audiophile poll - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

goose

Forum Senior Member

Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097

Posted: April 21 2006 at 20:13

Certainly notw but if live music were banned I wouldn't feel far off..!

MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21138

Posted: April 21 2006 at 19:09

Let me put it this way, goose: Would you feel like you've lost an arm if suddenly no more audiophile systems were available? Would you stop listening to music?

Recently listened to:

goose

Forum Senior Member

Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097

Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:57

I would vote for the latter, but since it's because of reasons best explained by the former it wouldn't make much sense:

In essence, I think that an "audiophile" system can lead to a very audible difference and in many instances more enjoyment. However, when the very microphones we use to record with change the sound (including the famous and expensive ones, although it's what's percieved as a pleasant change), once I get to the point of a hi-fi system which sounds fairly good (probably something slightly above what oliver posts in his affordable hi-fi threads), I really don't see any value in spending more money when I could go to a concert, which will have not only sound exactly like how it did when they played it (!) it will also have more of an atmosphere..!

Bj-1

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 04 2005
Location: No(r)Way
Status: Offline
Points: 31318

Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:39

I could live with a cheap stereo for years, if I have a good headset when Im listening to CD's on it

I don't like too bad sound quality when it comes to music, but I can live with it.

RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on!

The Miracle View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: May 29 2005
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 28427

Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:33

Second choice for me. Music is always music Smile

Experience may change a little, but it's not that significant IMO.

last.fm

MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21138

Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:34

^ Because it sounds like "pedophile" or "necrophile".

I don't know who invented the word, but we're stuck with it.

Recently listened to:

stonebeard View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057

Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:27

Why do I feel dirty whenever I say "Audiophile?"

My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21138

Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:23

Agreed. 128kbps results in a really noticeable difference especially in the high frequencies. But you can enjoy listening to that as well as you can enjoy watching a DVD movie.

Recently listened to:

Empathy

Forum Senior Member

Joined: June 30 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1864

Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:50

When are you two gonna kiss and make up? LOL

I firmly believe there IS a common ground.

I personally can't stand what 128kbps encoding does to high frequencies, but I'm sure many, many people would never be able to tell the difference.

I also think that the majority of "pre-fab" all-in-one stereo systems that are sold are designed to over-hype frequencies to the point where the _trained_ear_ can hear the differences... but again, the vast majority of people can't tell the difference.

However, I think that gold-plated speaker cables, power filtering, etc... all the things you'll find in the so-called "audiophile" systems are marketing drivel, and do nothing other than part you with your well-earned cash for a benefit that's purely subconscious.

Pure Brilliance:

MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21138

Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:36

I'm not talking about any specific persons here, just trying to get some opinions about the question in a poll which only has two extreme options and forces people to take sides. That's also why I added no "I'm kind of in the middle" option.

Recently listened to:

oliverstoned View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308

Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:31

Pathetic you said?

MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21138

Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:19

The poll options have limited length, so please also read these explanations:

Choice 1: Choose this if you think that music sounds that much worse on non audiophile systems that people who don't listen on audiophile systems are nor really listening to the "real deal" ... one criterium for this would be that you're convinced that the difference is immediately recognizable, like instruments you only hear on audiophile systems.
Edit: In this poll "audiophile" system is a really esoteric one with power line filters, expensive cables and connectors, CD players with separated drive and converters, single line amps (separate amps for left and right) and special sand filled speaker stands and strange wall "ornaments" that may (or may not, you decide) influence the sound.
Choice 2: You may think that audiophile systems sound better than cheap systems, but you're sure that spending 15,000 EUR for an audiophile system would be a waste of money because it won't make you enjoy the music more than listening on a cheap system. So would not object when an audiophile person tells you that his/her system is better, but you would insist that your system also sounds really good and that an improvement would be nice, but in no way necessary.
BTW: In this poll "cheap" system also includes computers, mp3 players, even internet radio (>128kbps) ... anything that audiophiles consider to be crap, but of course connected to decent amp & speakers.

For all those of you who can't decide ... just choose the option that you can agree more with.

Edited by MikeEnRegalia - April 21 2006 at 17:42

Recently listened to:

Poll Question: What do you think?
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Only audiophiles know how real music sounds.	5	[16.67%]
You can enjoy music perfectly fine on a cheap system.	25	[83.33%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
goose Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: June 20 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4097	Posted: April 21 2006 at 20:13
	Certainly notw but if live music were banned I wouldn't feel far off..!

MikeEnRegalia Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21138	Posted: April 21 2006 at 19:09
	Let me put it this way, goose: Would you feel like you've lost an arm if suddenly no more audiophile systems were available? Would you stop listening to music?
	Recently listened to:

goose Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: June 20 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4097	Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:57
	I would vote for the latter, but since it's because of reasons best explained by the former it wouldn't make much sense: In essence, I think that an "audiophile" system can lead to a very audible difference and in many instances more enjoyment. However, when the very microphones we use to record with change the sound (including the famous and expensive ones, although it's what's percieved as a pleasant change), once I get to the point of a hi-fi system which sounds fairly good (probably something slightly above what oliver posts in his affordable hi-fi threads), I really don't see any value in spending more money when I could go to a concert, which will have not only sound exactly like how it did when they played it (!) it will also have more of an atmosphere..!

Bj-1 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: June 04 2005 Location: No(r)Way Status: Offline Points: 31318	Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:39
	I could live with a cheap stereo for years, if I have a good headset when Im listening to CD's on it I don't like too bad sound quality when it comes to music, but I can live with it.
	RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on!

The Miracle Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: May 29 2005 Location: hell Status: Offline Points: 28427	Posted: April 21 2006 at 18:33
	Second choice for me. Music is always music Experience may change a little, but it's not that significant IMO.
	last.fm

MikeEnRegalia Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21138	Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:34
	^ Because it sounds like "pedophile" or "necrophile". I don't know who invented the word, but we're stuck with it.
	Recently listened to:

stonebeard Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: May 27 2005 Location: NE Indiana Status: Offline Points: 28057	Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:27
	Why do I feel dirty whenever I say "Audiophile?"
	My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!

MikeEnRegalia Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21138	Posted: April 21 2006 at 17:23
	Agreed. 128kbps results in a really noticeable difference especially in the high frequencies. But you can enjoy listening to that as well as you can enjoy watching a DVD movie.
	Recently listened to:

Empathy Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: June 30 2005 Status: Offline Points: 1864	Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:50
	When are you two gonna kiss and make up? I firmly believe there IS a common ground. I personally can't stand what 128kbps encoding does to high frequencies, but I'm sure many, many people would never be able to tell the difference. I also think that the majority of "pre-fab" all-in-one stereo systems that are sold are designed to over-hype frequencies to the point where the _trained_ear_ can hear the differences... but again, the vast majority of people can't tell the difference. However, I think that gold-plated speaker cables, power filtering, etc... all the things you'll find in the so-called "audiophile" systems are marketing drivel, and do nothing other than part you with your well-earned cash for a benefit that's purely subconscious.
	Pure Brilliance:

MikeEnRegalia Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21138	Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:36
	I'm not talking about any specific persons here, just trying to get some opinions about the question in a poll which only has two extreme options and forces people to take sides. That's also why I added no "I'm kind of in the middle" option.
	Recently listened to:

oliverstoned Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: March 26 2004 Location: France Status: Offline Points: 6308	Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:31
	Pathetic you said?

MikeEnRegalia Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21138	Posted: April 21 2006 at 16:19
	The poll options have limited length, so please also read these explanations: Choice 1: Choose this if you think that music sounds that much worse on non audiophile systems that people who don't listen on audiophile systems are nor really listening to the "real deal" ... one criterium for this would be that you're convinced that the difference is immediately recognizable, like instruments you only hear on audiophile systems. Edit: In this poll "audiophile" system is a really esoteric one with power line filters, expensive cables and connectors, CD players with separated drive and converters, single line amps (separate amps for left and right) and special sand filled speaker stands and strange wall "ornaments" that may (or may not, you decide) influence the sound. Choice 2: You may think that audiophile systems sound better than cheap systems, but you're sure that spending 15,000 EUR for an audiophile system would be a waste of money because it won't make you enjoy the music more than listening on a cheap system. So would not object when an audiophile person tells you that his/her system is better, but you would insist that your system also sounds really good and that an improvement would be nice, but in no way necessary. BTW: In this poll "cheap" system also includes computers, mp3 players, even internet radio (>128kbps) ... anything that audiophiles consider to be crap, but of course connected to decent amp & speakers. For all those of you who can't decide ... just choose the option that you can agree more with. Edited by MikeEnRegalia - April 21 2006 at 17:42
	Recently listened to: