| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
MikeEnRegalia 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
 Topic: The ultimate audiophile poll
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
|
|
|
 |
oliverstoned
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
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
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. 
|
|
|
|
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? 
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
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
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.
|
|
|
|
stonebeard
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?" 
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
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.
|
|
|
|
The Miracle
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.
|
|
|
|
Bj-1
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 04 2005
Location: No(r)Way
Status: Offline
Points: 31336
|
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!
|
|
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..!
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
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?
|
|
|
|
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
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: April 21 2006 at 20:15 |
Live music ... well, the atmosphere is great but the sound can be REALLY crappy. In most venues the acoustic situation is far from perfect, and depending on where you are in the hall/room it can be dreadful or decent.
|
|
|
|
mystic fred
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 09:48 |
put it this way....my first car was an old 1949 morris minor. i had a year's happy motoring in this car, a real buzz, my first car, until i outgrew it and wanted something a bit more...well , racey, and over the years i've had many cars of variable luxury but always enjoyed driving them. now i wouldn't dream of going back to the bumpy, slow old morris minor. i listened to my first rock and prog music from 1966 on an old pam mono record player with an autochanger (which i still use to play singles on) and i was perfectly happy with that, i listened to "led zeppelin", "sgt.pepper" and "tommy" on that for the first time (i visited a friend who had a stereo radiogram-unbelievable sound!) and i was absolutely thrilled. i upgraded to a stereo music centre, about 12 watts per channel, and it was a revelation. these days my equipment is somewhat more sophisticated but i always think it could be improved, my listening experienced is enhanced but i never recaptured the buzz i got from that old pam record player again, so i voted "You can enjoy music perfectly fine on a cheap system" ...and so you can! 
|
 Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 09:52 |
|
option 2
|
|
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 11:09 |
|
As i always says, a good system doesn't needs to be expensive to work.
And about analog's superiority, i told you recently about the tests i made, using a cheap (30€!)-but musical- Sennheiser px100H headphones, comparing a cheap Sony Cassette Walkman and MP3 players and how (not surprisingly)Walkman easily win.
It shows that even on the more cheap ad basic equipment,
analog wins. The difference is obvious, don't need gold ears. Ther's one with hurts the eardrums, the other not.
Edited by oliverstoned - April 22 2006 at 11:11
|
|
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 11:16 |
 Empathy wrote:
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.
|
You think, but you haven't tried.
You rely on theories, while i rely on experience.
Edited by oliverstoned - April 22 2006 at 11:16
|
|
GoldenSpiral
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3839
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 11:23 |
|
The money would be much better spent on CDs to enjoy on my cheap system.
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 11:25 |
oliverstoned wrote:
And about analog's superiority, i told you recently about the tests i made, using a cheap (30€!)-but musical- Sennheiser px100H headphones, comparing a cheap Sony Cassette Walkman and MP3 players and how (not surprisingly)Walkman easily win.
|
Which mp3 player did you use, and which bitrate ... and was the file ripped from the CD professionally?
Edited by MikeEnRegalia - April 22 2006 at 11:27
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21195
|
Posted: April 22 2006 at 11:26 |
oliverstoned wrote:
As i always says, a good system doesn't needs to be expensive to work. |
Isn't it one of the audiophile principles that when even the smallest element in the "chain" is inferior, it all sounds like crap? How can someone then listen to a small system without power line filters and still enjoy it?
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The ultimate audiophile poll
