Does Everything Make a Difference?

[PYP]

I happen to be in the camp that believes you cannot tell very much from lists of system components, not even from photos of the system, even if it looks fabulous. The Emperor’s New Clothes sort of thing.

Well, maybe if the Emperor is into shoes or something. This word might better describe how folks feel about their gear (probably not 1c):

fetish​

noun​

fe·tish ?fe-tish
also
?f?-

variants or less commonly fetich
Synonyms of fetish
1
a
: an object (such as a small stone carving of an animal) believed to have magical power to protect or aid its owner
broadly : a material object regarded with superstitious or extravagant trust or reverence
b
: an object of irrational reverence or obsessive devotion : PREPOSSESSION
c
: an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression

2
: FIXATION

3
: a rite or cult of fetish worshippers

 

[Geoffkait]

Yikes!

 

[PYP]

Yikes!

The audiophile fetish isn't carved by hand from stone, bone or wood; it is carved from a solid billet of aluminum in order to protect against EMI, RFI, vibration and bad sound.

 

[Geoffkait]

I’m hip.

 

[Analog Scott]

Here is Al's post from yesterday. It is well written. He went to the BSO last Friday with fellow memeber MadFloyd. They clearly enjoyed the afternoon at the symphony and experiencing the live music.

Recent Concerts You've Enjoyed

Thought this might be a fun thread and a way to find out about acts on tour. My wife and I saw the Smoke Fairies at the Tractor Tavern last evening as the opening act for Rasputina. The Smoke Fairies are a 'folk blues' duo from Wales and have been described as "Bob Dylan's dream." I thought...

www.whatsbestforum.com

Not sure this is such a good example to use as a counter argument. He talks more about sound and does so using audiophile jargon than anything else. But I am glad he enjoyed himself.

Here is a link to the Boston Globe review. Note how much of the review is spent on talking about sound quality. Almost none and absolutely none in audiophile speak.

A sunny concerto and a haunting ‘Bluebeard’s Castle’ with the BSO - The Boston Globe

Guest conductor Karina Canellakis led the orchestra through a program with two halves like day and night.

www.bostonglobe.com

OTOH I copied all the audiophile talk regarding sound quality from Al’s post. It’s at least half of his review


was beautiful, and the string sound really was uncommonly airy.

The same small string orchestra presented a much less airy, more compacted tone when they played Haydn's cello concerto. It was another interesting example of how different the sound of strings can be from the same players.

Her playing was much more "scratchy", with abandon, than it would be in a more polished regular recording, but it fit the expressiveness of the music very well. The tone of the solo cello had less body than it would have in a smaller venue, but the sound was beautiful and its definition was superb

The orchestral music was a feast of sound. We sat relatively close to the orchestra looking up to the stage, and the sound was very large and powerful. It featured incredible blends of timbre (Bartok was a master orchestrator), and even though the sound was so powerful, there was not the slightest hint of 'edge' or brightness. The sound had incredible tonal density while being emphatically airy at the same time. This kind of sound would be very hard to reproduce on a stereo system. First, that tonal density alone is out of reach of any system that I have heard so far. Second, either you have more emphasis on tonal density or more emphasis on airiness, but to have both combined with such intensity is something I have only heard live so far, and this occasion was a particularly striking example. Dynamics and their impact were out of this world, from very soft to extremely loud, at climaxes supported by the organ in the hall. Try that at home. Tempi and nuances were well judged by the conductor, and the BSO played the hell out of the score.”

Again, glad they enjoyed the concert. But if you compare his review to the Boston Globe it doesn’t exactly contradict what I was saying about many audiophiles’ trips to the concert hall

 

[Analog Scott]

But sometimes you can look at someones system and know he is so full of it, obviously overestimating what it can do, or his own hearing capabilities ! Without a system list i give very little credit to a posters assessments. I am not saying everyone has to submit a perfect hearing test and own equipment in the hundreds of thousand range, but some gear just don't cut it in my personal opinion !

Which has the foul smell of audiophile status to me.

We need to know his system so we know where he ranks.

Not interested.

 

[Lagonda]

Which has the foul smell of audiophile status to me.

We need to know his system so we know where he ranks.

Not interested.

And then we know the rest anyway ! Someone willing to post details of his previous system for status but not willing to post his current, tells it all anyway !

 

[Rexp]

I have some live “audience” Grateful Dead tapes, the ones recorded up front, in front of the soundboard, by fans with those weird looking binaural mics on tall stalks on Nakamichi cassette decks, that are VERY convincing. It’s enough to make the hair on the back of your head stand up.

On headphones the soundstage is ten to twenty feet, sometimes 30 feet, out in front of me. I’m not hot dogging you. And it’s very realistic, palpable and present. Same goes for Dead Can Dance CDs, Within the Realm of the Dying Sun and Serpent and Egg, for example. They don’t call it ambient music for nothing. Getting the soundstage outside the headphones - But don’t try this at home, kids, stay in school.

it’s the same signal that goes to speakers, so why wouldn’t headphones be *capable* of out of the head soundstage, especially without room interference? I’m not saying it’s easy. It’s not. If it was easy everyone could do it.

What is your headphone set up? I've not heard good imaging with headphones in the past. How does it differ from your speakers?

 

[Analog Scott]

And then we know the rest anyway ! Someone willing to post details of his previous system for status but not willing to post his current, tells it all anyway !

And so it goes. Comfort in status. Your position is secure.

It’s almost as if you were trying to prove my point.

 

[Lagonda]

And so it goes. Comfort in status. Your position is secure.

It’s almost as if you were trying to prove my point.

Do you ever have a point, except being opposite ?

 

[PYP]

If all you can afford is enough, enough may be as good as you need.

This is an area where hifi sources (magazines, online) could potentially be helpful. But they don't seem to be. While it is logical to review one item at a time, it doesn't really help folks who are on a tight budget or anyone who considers a setup to be an integrated system.

As has been said by many here, synergy among pieces of gear is key, as is the amp/speaker interface and speaker placement within the room. Perhaps the integrated, powered systems with some bass adjustment will help. You listen to a whole system and buy according to your budget. If it is easy to place in your room, then you are more likely to hear what you heard at the demo.

 

[PYP]

Native American bear fetish on top of Dutch audiophile Tambaqui fish fetish.

 

[Analog Scott]

Do you ever have a point, except being opposite ?

The point of posting my older equipment was to address several cliches about those of us who accept the science on audio and human hearing and nip those cliches in the bud. Cliches like…

1. Clearly you have never heard a “real” high end system
2. Clearly your system isn’t resolving enough to hear differences
3. Clearly you claim high end tweaks and accessories don’t work because you have never owned them and/or can’t afford them.

And yet out of that you managed to pull out yet another cliche. “You are just a contrarian who wants to argue.”

But all of these cliches fit into one basic logical fallacy. Ad Hominen

And ad hominem doesn’t look like a logical fallacy at all when one buys into status and makes a deep emotional investment in their status.

It eventually degrades into toxic fandom, irrational tribalism and self appointed gate keeping.

My “points,” my assertions of fact and my arguments are not contingent on my “audiophile status.” And yet that is where the arguments always go. My “points,” my assertions and my arguments sink or swim on their own merits.

 

[Kingrex]

Whoops.. Morbid curiosity made me look, and yep, same thread.

 

[dcathro]

The point of posting my older equipment was to address several cliches about those of us who accept the science on audio and human hearing and nip those cliches in the bud. Cliches like…

1. Clearly you have never heard a “real” high end system
2. Clearly your system isn’t resolving enough to hear differences
3. Clearly you claim high end tweaks and accessories don’t work because you have never owned them and/or can’t afford them.

And yet out of that you managed to pull out yet another cliche. “You are just a contrarian who wants to argue.”

But all of these cliches fit into one basic logical fallacy. Ad Hominen

And ad hominem doesn’t look like a logical fallacy at all when one buys into status and makes a deep emotional investment in their status.

It eventually degrades into toxic fandom, irrational tribalism and self appointed gate keeping.

My “points,” my assertions of fact and my arguments are not contingent on my “audiophile status.” And yet that is where the arguments always go. My “points,” my assertions and my arguments sink or swim on their own merits.

But what are you achieving?

Do you think you are going to win over the minds of the enthusiasts that are committed to spending their time and money on something they enjoy, suggesting that most of it is in their imagination.

It has all been said before, for the past 50 years - all CD players sound the same (digital is perfect), all competent amps sound identical, cables make no real difference, etc, etc.

I personally don't like spending silly money on audio, preferring to spend my time with DIY, but I don't criticize anyone for spending their money, or for their taste.

I do hear quite large differences in equipment, but personally find that a lot of today's expensive equipment is not at all to my taste.

Your posts make me think of some friends back when I was at university. They studied geology and, armed with their new found knowledge on the age of the earth, they would spend their lunch hours heckling Christians who were evangelising in the common areas.

 

[treitz3]

Okay, let's not get religion into the conversation.

@Analog Scott. You are about 2 decades behind this forum on many things. TBT, your banter is old and outdated. Your knowledge is vast but the talking points make many members want to....

Please stop.

We do rule with a gentle hand but enough is enough. Please consider this a formal warning.

Tom

 

[Analog Scott]

But what are you achieving?

I don’t know if I am “achieving” anything. It’s an audio forum and the question was asked.

I answered.

Not all discussions are “achievement” oriented. If I gave anyone something to think about then that would be something. If not….oh well

Do you think you are going to win over the minds of the enthusiasts that are committed to spending their time and money on something they enjoy, suggesting that most of it is in their imagination.

It’s not about “winning over” anyone. And let’s clear a couple things up here and now. I am an audio enthusiast and committed to spending my time and money on something I enjoy. The pursuit of state of the art audio playback.

If you think I have made any claims about audiophiles “imagining differences” I strongly suggest you reread what I gave actual said and try to avoid making assumptions or leaping to conclusions and attributing those assumptions and conclusions to me.

Also I would highly highly recommend watching the video of James Johnston’s talk I posted.

It has all been said before, for the past 50 years - all CD players sound the same (digital is perfect), all competent amps sound identical, cables make no real difference, etc, etc.

But that is not what I have said or am saying. Maybe let’s put away the overly broad paint brushes for a while.

I personally don't like spending silly money on audio, preferring to spend my time with DIY, but I don't criticize anyone for spending their money, or for their taste.

Where have I criticized anyone, ANYONE for their taste?

[Political discussion removed]

 

[tima]

The point of posting my older equipment was to address several cliches about those of us who accept the science on audio and human hearing and nip those cliches in the bud. Cliches like…

1. Clearly you have never heard a “real” high end system
2. Clearly your system isn’t resolving enough to hear differences
3. Clearly you claim high end tweaks and accessories don’t work because you have never owned them and/or can’t afford them.

And yet out of that you managed to pull out yet another cliche. “You are just a contrarian who wants to argue.”

Fwiw, a phrase becomes cliché from overuse, not because it's false or misleading.

 

[treitz3]

If you think I have made any claims about audiophiles “imagining differences” I strongly suggest you reread what I gave actual said...

Well, you have. One only has to go back to where you first started your diatribe. Placebo.

In many people's eyes? This does not differ from "imagining things".

Immediately cease and desist on bringing up your religion (or thoughts/beliefs thereof). That is against the TOS of this forum. Your next warning will come with an involuntary vacation.

Tom

 

[dcathro]

Okay, let's not get religion into the conversation.

Sorry