Lost in music: the world of obsessive audiophilia

[Electro]

There is an article in the Guardian today that you might find interesting . *smile*

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/nov/29/lost-in-music-the-world-of-obsessive-audiophilia

 

[spiny norman]

There is an intersting article in the Guardian today that you might find interesting . *smile*

Interesting.

 

[DIB]

Yeah, thanks very much indeed. You do realise that I'm now turning over the corners of all the pages of all my books in the front room? I'm just annoyed I didn't know about this tweak before.

.

 

[DocG]

I especially liked this

This is why my wife believes hi-fi is the male version of wrinkle cream – dubious claims, expensive prices, results only apparent to the buyer.

Makes a lot of sense!

Thanks for sharing.

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_664715932]

Very interesting! Thanks for sharing it.

 

[Vladimir]

.

 

[Electro]

There is an interesting article in the Guardian today that you might find interesting . *smile*

Interesting.

*biggrin*

 

[drummerman]

.

Why?

It just describes (pretty accurately) the way it is.

Women mostly uninterested (other than hifi having to blend in with the decor or completely invisible), some blokes loaded, others on a budget ... and goes on to give examples of each.

Imho it pretty much sums things up in a non-patronising way.

The only thing I slightly disagree with is the bit where he describes youths brought up on ipods and spotify as 'non-audiophiles'. I actually think that apple, headphones and the better streaming services have (and will) bring people closer to appreciate good quality music. Some will no doubt 'progress' to good quality streaming systems, lossless downloads/music and behold ... may even be tempted to dip their toes into vinyl. - From there its only a very short journey to being obsessed

Nothing new for most of us but then the piece was written for the greater (non-hifi-obsessed) public.

 

[Al ears]

.

Why?

It just describes (pretty accurately) the way it is.

Women mostly uninterested (other than hifi having to blend in with the decor or completely invisible), some blokes loaded, others on a budget ... and goes on to give examples of each.

Imho it pretty much sums things up in a non-patronising way.

The only thing I slightly disagree with is the bit where he describes youths brought up on ipods and spotify as 'non-audiophiles'. I actually think that apple, headphones and the better streaming services have (and will) bring people closer to appreciate good quality music. Some will no doubt 'progress' to good quality streaming systems, lossless downloads/music and behold ... may even be tempted to dip their toes into vinyl. - From there its only a very short journey to being obsessed

Nothing new for most of us but then the piece was written for the greater (non-hifi-obsessed) public.

Hear, hear.

 

[Vladimir]

.

Why?

It just describes (pretty accurately) the way it is.

Women mostly uninterested (other than hifi having to blend in with the decor or completely invisible), some blokes loaded, others on a budget ... and goes on to give examples of each.

Imho it pretty much sums things up in a non-patronising way.

The only thing I slightly disagree with is the bit where he describes youths brought up on ipods and spotify as 'non-audiophiles'. I actually think that apple, headphones and the better streaming services have (and will) bring people closer to appreciate good quality music. Some will no doubt 'progress' to good quality streaming systems, lossless downloads/music and behold ... may even be tempted to dip their toes into vinyl. - From there its only a very short journey to being obsessed

Nothing new for most of us but then the piece was written for the greater (non-hifi-obsessed) public.

Whole article revolved around money* and lifestyle, not about the synergy of music and technology. How much does it cost and how does it fit my lifestyle? - is the only thing that interests most people in this hobby. Wine, cheese and hi-fi. I really can't tell them appart in a double-blind test.

* The £ symbol appeared 38 times in that article.

 

[Al ears]

.

Why?

It just describes (pretty accurately) the way it is.

Women mostly uninterested (other than hifi having to blend in with the decor or completely invisible), some blokes loaded, others on a budget ... and goes on to give examples of each.

Imho it pretty much sums things up in a non-patronising way.

The only thing I slightly disagree with is the bit where he describes youths brought up on ipods and spotify as 'non-audiophiles'. I actually think that apple, headphones and the better streaming services have (and will) bring people closer to appreciate good quality music. Some will no doubt 'progress' to good quality streaming systems, lossless downloads/music and behold ... may even be tempted to dip their toes into vinyl. - From there its only a very short journey to being obsessed

Nothing new for most of us but then the piece was written for the greater (non-hifi-obsessed) public.

Whole article revolved around money* and lifestyle, not about the synergy of music and technology. How much does it cost and how does it fit my lifestyle? - is the only thing that interests most people in this hobby. Wine, cheese and hi-fi. I really can't tell them appart in a double-blind test.

* The £ symbol appeared 38 times in that article.

Good job I cannot give up my Manchego and Vacqueras then.

 

[drummerman]

Whole article revolved around money* and lifestyle, not about the synergy of music and technology. How much does it cost and how does it fit my lifestyle? - is the only thing that interests most people in this hobby. Wine, cheese and hi-fi. I really can't tell them appart in a double-blind test.

* The £ symbol appeared 38 times in that article.

Yup. These are the concepts that people (non-audiophiles, also known as normal) understand.

Mention 'synergy of music' to most folks and they will look at you with raised eyebrows.

Actually, say you've spent 'only' £1k on a system and my guess is the same look will form on their faces.

What I did like about the article was that there were affordable suggestions, one being QAcoustics BT3 (a very tempting proposition if you look at my other thread) which offers hifi and versatility in a small, domestically acceptable and fuss free way for a few hundred pounds, something joepublic is more able to grasp and afford than the £200k example.

 

[davedotco]

Personally I found the whole tone of the piece somewhat patronising.

It seems to suggest that anyone interested in decent quality musical playback in the home is some sort of obsessive.

I would take exception to that.

(The wrinkle cream analogy is spot on the money though...*blush*)

 

[MeanandGreen]

I find it odd that the guy doesn't even particularly like the album he mentions he's listening to. He is listening purely because of the sound quality. That is just odd, he's not listening to music anymore he's listening purely to audio.

it wasn't a very interesting article, it's all about way over inflated price tags with no real explanation behind it.

 

[radiorog]

An interesting read, I liked it. The whole concept of the article was does money buy better sound?, in which he answers twice, as yes. I empathise with his description of listening to an album he usually wouldn't. With better HiFi, you can appreciate music that you can't on lesser HiFi, surely anyone here knows this, this is why we are here right?

 

[lindsayt]

It's quite easy to come up with a system that sounds better - in certain key respects - than the £400k Absolute Sounds one or the £100k / £200k Linn one. And to do it for less than £10k.

All you have to do is cheat a bit. Well not actually cheat. But make up a system according to different rules.

A high prorportion of the men into hi-fi in the UK would score high on an Aspergers test. It does attract a high proportion of obsessive types. But then again there are plenty of non-obsessives with great sounding systems.