Is Audiophilia a Dying Hobby or Just in Need of a Tune-Up?

[Lee]

So who is being lined up to pay for and provide the gear? Who will oversea the room and equipment? Who decides what music genre is in the advertising that will drive them to the room, and played while they are there? I'd venture that the UVAs music department's music interest will differ grately from that of the students. What time of day is this classroom open for listening that either doesn't interfere with classes or is going to entice them to come back "after hours"? Etc etc. Also, without being party to these conversations how does the UVA's music department agenda support the agenda of better music sound via better equipment?

This will answer some of your questions.

Home | Ralston Listening Library

The library's main listening room holds over 15,000 records as well as rare scores and books about music. An adjacent room holds over 15,000 compact discs.

new.sewanee.edu

 

[Lee]

@facten

 

[hopkins]

True, but there is a part of the 'fraction' that is only available from the analog glory days. Example - I've yet to find Ahmad Jamal's 'Heat Wave' on QoBuz, yet that superb '66 recording sounds wonderful on my TT

Yes it goes both ways, but by embracing both you maximize your chances (opportunities). P.S. digital is not limited to Qobuz.

 

[Rt66indierock]

I am sympathetic to indierock's point of view. You describe the introduction of digital and then the improvements to digital and then streaming since 1981. Well, for those who think that analog sounds better than any of that digital, there has been little if any real progress since then. There are certainly differences in how music is recorded, produced, and distributed, so formats have changed and things are cheaper, smaller, and more convenient. Music is portable, and tween kids all have music in their pockets. I think the question was about sound quality hitting your ear. I am not convinced that the experience has gotten any better, or more real sounding.

My speakers are from 1959, my cartridge is from the 80s maybe or older, I just installed the Denon DD turntable I had in college, also 1981, and it all just sounds fantastic, and better than my former SME/Pass/Magico system. Most of the hi end gear I hear leaves me cold and not any more involved in the music. And I do not think it sounds any more real. Sure, this years DAC or Magico speakers sound better than last years model, but, compare them to a big Micro Seiki turntable from the 80s, or some classic large horn speakers, or JBL M9500s, and I scratch my head.

I agree, but digital or analog a terrific listening experience is just that. Similarly a great live experience from my youth is no different than a great live experience now.

 

[PeterA]

That's all great, but with your all analog system, you can listen to only a fraction of what I can listen to... At some point, one has to choose. Sure, analog may sound better than digital, but music sounds better than silence

I thought the discussion was about audio quality progress since 1981. Absolutely having endless selection at the tip of your finger on a piece of glass is awesome. Listening to music is certainly more convenient and mobile and inexpensive than it ever was. I’m not denigrating your Digital. I’m saying I don’t see a lot of progress in the quality of music reproduction and how convincing it sounds.

You are making a completely different argument and that’s fine.

 

[Tangram]

I generally agree with Peter. Where I see some modern progress is around things like isolation and footers, the use of constrained layer damping, and indirectly, for analog, advances in record cleaning technology, specifically ultrasonic cleaning. But I’d be hard pressed to say the core equipment (source, amplification, speakers) has seen massive advancements in sound quality. Personally I tend to gravitate to modern analogs of older ideas since I like the overall better build quality/reliability/fixability.

 

[AudioHR]

In thinking about a college campus I am curious how you would propose going about this where it would actually draw attention and make an impact ?

It's an idea that is worth exploring but no doubt it would be easier said than done.

I would start with a conversation with hi fi retailers/manufacturers and interested stakeholders to see if they are willing to commit their expertise, time and product to such a venture. Hopefully there would be those far sighted enough to see the future benefit. If these is interest then there would be further conversation about how best to proceed.

If there is interest from the industry then I would think it would be important to approach some college student bodies to gauge their interest and see how they think their peers could be best engaged. It could look quite different in each college. Involving students and making then co decision makers is key in my mind.

I could see running a few pilot projects. What could it look like; a cafe listening venue, headphone lounges, weekly hi end demonstrations in a proper space, talk to the professionals opportunities, DIY seminars.....use your imagination. Have interested students engaged in planning and implementation of whatever is offered.

A forum like What's Best would have many members who could be be powerful advocates for such an initiative!

 

[hopkins]

I thought the discussion was about audio quality progress since 1981. Absolutely having endless selection at the tip of your finger on a piece of glass is awesome. Listening to music is certainly more convenient and mobile and inexpensive than it ever was. I’m not denigrating your Digital. I’m saying I don’t see a lot of progress in the quality of music reproduction and how convincing it sounds.

You are making a completely different argument and that’s fine.

To be fair, it's not only about convenience.

Many releases (in all "genres") are now only available in digital formats - and that includes also an ever increasing number of old recordings, sometimes previously unissued, that have been restored digitally.

Regardless, if you only listen to vinyl it is going to be difficult for you to have an informed point of view on the progress of digital.

 

[Al M.]

To be fair, it's not only about convenience.

Many releases are now only available in digital formats - and that includes also an ever increasing number of old recordings, sometimes previously unissued, that have been restored digitally.

Yes, indeed. There are tons of musical performances that I listen to which are available on digital only. For that reason alone vinyl as the only source would not work for me.

It's not "convenience", it is musical content.

 

[Rt66indierock]

To be fair, it's not only about convenience.

Many releases (in all "genres") are now only available in digital formats - and that includes also an ever increasing number of old recordings, sometimes previously unissued, that have been restored digitally.

Regardless, if you only listen to vinyl it is going to be difficult for you to have an informed point of view on the progress of digital.

I'm only talking about the sound reaching youyr ears. And in my case I've been around digital audio since it was a theory of James Russell.

 

[hopkins]

I'm only talking about the sound reaching youyr ears. And in my case I've been around digital audio since it was a theory of James Russell.

I was not referring to you.

 

[facten]

This will answer some of your questions.

Home | Ralston Listening Library

The library's main listening room holds over 15,000 records as well as rare scores and books about music. An adjacent room holds over 15,000 compact discs.

new.sewanee.edu

Saw that someone else posted it and my response to that remains the same that doesn't get to your notion of having a somewhat affordable system that might demonstrate better sound to them. And, it doesn't answer any of the specifics of the potential engagement with UVA in doing so

 

[PeterA]

Yes, indeed. There are tons of musical performances that I listen to which are available on digital only. For that reason alone vinyl as the only source would not work for me.

It's not "convenience", it is musical content.

The discussion is not about access or convenience. It is about the sonic progress that has or has not been made in 40 years. The fact that we even debate about analog versus digital endlessly is evidence of a lack of progress.

Unlimited access to music and convenience are different issues. This is about absolute sound quality and realism and engagement, regardless of format. What progress has been made?

Present your argument.

 

[Al M.]

The discussion is not about access or convenience.

It was you, Peter, who brought up the convenience argument (#125) and things flowed from there.

 

[Robh3606]

Audiophilia is facing a crisis. With most enthusiasts over 55 and younger generations uninterested in high-end audio, the hobby risks fading into obscurity. Blame it on space, budget constraints, or the elitist image of the community—something needs to change.

40% of Audiophiles May Be Gone Soon, and No One Is Replacing Them

Can we make audiophilia relevant and inviting for the next generation, or is this truly the end of an era?

The original post by the OP. Certainly not about convivence or a definite time frame.

Rob

 

[PeterA]

It was you, Peter, who brought up the convenience argument (#125) and things flowed from there.

Yes as an example of the progress that has been made but not in response to the original question about the quality of sound that reaches the ear. All along people bring in straw men like digital is better now than it was. That avoids the issue. That is a different topic.

Here is the post that started this discussion. “just the sound, reaching my ears“. I haven’t noticed anyone answering this question.

Please explain what progress you think the industry has made over the system I owned between age 28 and 34, 1981 to 1988. Just the sound reaching my ears.

 

[tima]

I generally agree with Peter. Where I see some modern progress is around things like isolation and footers, the use of constrained layer damping, and indirectly, for analog, advances in record cleaning technology, specifically ultrasonic cleaning. ... .

Yes, two good examples. Visco-elastic technology is relatively modern and continues to evolve. Modern ultrasonics for record cleaning extends the viability of the vinyl medium while both resurrecting and preserving it's past

 

[ssfas]

Yes, two good examples. Visco-elastic technology is relatively modern and continues to evolve. Modern ultrasonics for record cleaning extends the viability of the vinyl medium while both resurrecting and preserving it's past

Sorbothane, one of the most common viscoelastic materials, was invented 50 years ago in the UK and for the last 40 years has been widely used as the insole in sports shoes by most of the major global brands.

I bought a Loricraft record cleaner 12 years ago. It was launched in 1990, almost 35 years ago. It's just as good as an ultrasonic machine, if not better.

What adds to the likely demise of audiophilia is that my Loricraft, which dramatically improves vinyl playback, cost me £1,400 new in 2012 and now after Terry sold the business to SME the price has gone up to £4,400.

Since the CD in 1984, the only significant progress in my mind has been Class D power and streaming. Both facilitate high quality audio at much cheaper prices, probably making people wonder whether physical media and big amplifiers are really necessary.

 

[Lee]

Saw that someone else posted it and my response to that remains the same that doesn't get to your notion of having a somewhat affordable system that might demonstrate better sound to them. And, it doesn't answer any of the specifics of the potential engagement with UVA in doing so

We have already thought through much of the mechanics with UVA but here are the broad strokes…

1. Like Ralston, UVA has a well-run honor system. Students will run the room with guidance from professors.
2. At least two alumni will donate music collections although I believe we can get some label participation.
3. Several manufacturers have said they would donate gear at accommodation prices.

The proposal at UVA is specifically not an affordable system but one to show what is possible which I would argue is more valuable. Ideally we want to build out a room with excellent acoustics.

The discussion with David Chesky was more about an affordable system that would travel in a van to multiple campuses. Harman did this with a semi for Revel and Levinson but the gear was expensive and half the truck was home theater.

 

[Lee]

I generally agree with Peter. Where I see some modern progress is around things like isolation and footers, the use of constrained layer damping, and indirectly, for analog, advances in record cleaning technology, specifically ultrasonic cleaning. But I’d be hard pressed to say the core equipment (source, amplification, speakers) has seen massive advancements in sound quality. Personally I tend to gravitate to modern analogs of older ideas since I like the overall better build quality/reliability/fixability.

I think what some are missing is that modern improvements have come in the form of using new technologies and methods to improve on the broader approaches in playback. Things like…

New tonearm materials
Better noise reduction on platters and plinths
Better speed control
Technology for more pistonic driver performance (Borreson’s coatings, new materials at Magico)
Improved crossover design
Higher performance capacitors
Carbon fiber and polymer technology to make cabinets more inert
A raft of improvements to make digital playback both more linear and more musical (better conversion, better clocks, mono DACs)

However there are totally new technologies available now:

New technology in amplifiers such Class D, H and GAN…Bruno Putzey’s work…
New technology for noise reduction in power lines and routers/switches/ethernet/streaming
New cable technologies such as Audioquest, Shunyata, and Synergistic’s work on a variety of filters and metallurgy