I had a friend growing up whose dad was a huge audiophile. They lived in a smallish house, drove modest cars, didn't vacation extravagantly... really very down to Earth about most things except his stereo.

It was like a disease. 2 grand for a new amplifier for the surround speakers. 8k planar foil speakers. Separate power supplies for pretty much everything. Endless variations on setup, wiring, amps, etc... I really don't know how much he had invested in the system.... likely 75k at least. Seemed like there was always something new being put in or modified.

Funny thing is, for how good the system sounded, I hardly ever saw him in there listening. We mostly used the room to watch laser discs and play Sega. Oh well, I'm sure he enjoyed it... I guess it's not much different than owning a sports car and not really driving it much.

One thing for sure... the makers of high-end equipment know their audience and know how to convince them to part with their money.

alywa: It was like a disease. 2 grand for a new amplifier for the surround speakers. 8k planar foil speakers. Separate power supplies for pretty much everything. Endless variations on setup, wiring, amps, etc... I really don't know how much he had invested in the system.... likely 75k at least.

Amateur. (new window) (just as a hint of the cost of that system: the 30 amplifiers are about $5,000.00 each)

Audiophiles? You mean the morons who buy $8,000 speaker cables that would have to be magical to live up to their claims?

That was the most ridiculously insane piece I've read since the last time I clicked an American Thinker link. A $350,000 stereo system isn't going to sound any better than a $350 one in the right room.

Ridiculous.

audiophiles

Who?

/music tab

This article could go one step further and show why the mp3 is killing music in another way: the destruction of the album format. No longer is the single used to sell an entire album, instead the single is the product. We used to biatch about buying an album of fluff to get one song, so we get what we thought we wanted - the one song - instantly compressed, equalized, and capped to fit in a 1/4" earbud speaker.

Having people still interested in not only hearing an album that has superior sound quality, but also allows the craft of creating a well-produced album to really shine through is extremely important as well. There's something to be said for a band putting thought into what song is going open and close at least the album, if not each side of the album, and how to carry you through from Disc 1, Side A to Side B to Disc 2 Side A to Side B.

cameroncrazy1984: A $350,000 stereo system isn't going to sound any better than a $350 one in the right room.


Yeah... in a room full of deaf people.

cameroncrazy1984: A $350,000 stereo system isn't going to sound any better than a $350 one in the right room.

It's sad that people don't give their ears much credit.

El Chode: This article could go one step further and show why the mp3 is killing music in another way: the destruction of the album format. No longer is the single used to sell an entire album, instead the single is the product. We used to biatch about buying an album of fluff to get one song, so we get what we thought we wanted - the one song - instantly compressed, equalized, and capped to fit in a 1/4" earbud speaker.

Having people still interested in not only hearing an album that has superior sound quality, but also allows the craft of creating a well-produced album to really shine through is extremely important as well. There's something to be said for a band putting thought into what song is going open and close at least the album, if not each side of the album, and how to carry you through from Disc 1, Side A to Side B to Disc 2 Side A to Side B.

Well said.

cameroncrazy1984: A $350,000 stereo system isn't going to sound any better than a $350 one in the right room.

or to anyone who doesn't know what "good" sound is, which is most of the population.

El Chode:

You do realize the album-as-art-form concept is only about 40 years old?

Rev. Skarekroe: You do realize the album-as-art-form concept is only about 40 years old?

So is punk. I don't see your point.

patrick767: Audiophiles? You mean the morons who buy $8,000 speaker cables that would have to be magical to live up to their claims?

We audiophiles call them idiots, just like everybody else.

/Klipsch speakers.
//McIntosh amp.
///Blue Jeans cables.

FTFA'sC: "I love great technology, but sometimes Analog is just better in every sense. Audio, automobiles, women."

Gold.

She said she was 18
..
.
oooh, audiophiles.. gotcha
-------------
I don't understand people who spend 10k+ on home audio.. unless they have a true home theater with 25+ seats and a regulation size screen.
Having said that, I enjoy better-performing, higher end vehicles.. but the difference is 35k vs 70k.. not 1k vs $350k..

Can the people who spend that much on home audio really, honestly, tell the difference? Then, is the difference really worth that much?

SmashLimousines:
Well said.

My opinion exactly. I know a couple of independent musicians and it seems like they're actually changing their composition and creative methods to suit the distribution. When a song idea hits them, they don't sit on it and wait to compile an EP or LP, they get it out there asap.

Look, I will throw this out there. Lately I have been grabbing multi-channel 24/96 FLACs of extracted MLP audio from DVD-A discs.

I don't even have that great of a system, just a decent enough sound card, and a reciever that takes all the various digital flavours up to 24/96.

There is absolutely No. Contest. between vinyl, any other format I have ever heard. In fact, the discs that I have are albums that I have listened to for twenty years as an obbsessive audiophile freak, and I hear shiat that the 2" tape got that the LP and CD *never* showed.

Seriously. We need higher bitrates, and a return to proper mastering that doesn't involve turning the compressor all the way up and making a smiley face on the EQ.

NikolaiFarkoff: My opinion exactly. I know a couple of independent musicians and it seems like they're actually changing their composition and creative methods to suit the distribution. When a song idea hits them, they don't sit on it and wait to compile an EP or LP, they get it out there asap.

My favorite band is releasing a record store-only album technically this Saturday (indie record store day) though it's apparently popped up in a few stores all over. It's not being released via iTunes or anywhere else. The point is to go, be social, have that anticipation of going to the record store again, and meeting someone else who may have a recommendation for you.

ScubaDude1960: We audiophiles call them idiots, just like everybody else.

/Klipsch speakers.
//McIntosh amp.
///Blue Jeans cables.

I have some Klipsch THX-Certified computer speakers - they're brilliant. I don't have a need for much more, as I live in an apartment complex and my neighbors would not be happy.

That being said, I'm sad that even singles for DJ use are more commonly sold as 320KB/sec MP3 instead of on vinyl...I mean, at least give us 96k/48-bit AIFF or WAV, hell, even FLAC.

It just feels like in music (and the rest of the entertainment industry in general) the standards have been consistently lowered into meritocracy. No one gives a fark anymore.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: Seriously. We need higher bitrates, and a return to proper mastering that doesn't involve turning the compressor all the way up and making a smiley face on the EQ.

This is the greatest statement I've ever seen you make.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: Seriously. We need higher bitrates, and a return to proper mastering that doesn't involve turning the compressor all the way up and making a smiley face on the EQ.

My conspiracy theory self thinks that since back in the 80s, when the music industry lost their argument against recording off the radio due to the degradation of sound quality between the broadcast/original version of the song and the quality that wound up on the cassette, they decided to intentionally reduce the sound quality of digital media, so that ripping it on your computer or your iPod wouldn't cause the necessary degradation in order to let it be a legit "copy".

If I remember correctly, most CD player lasers can't read the full bit rate on the CD, or at the very least, some data is lost each time you transfer a song, which is an essential premise of my argument.

I mention this slight-very slight, but noticeable-hiss to Fremer, and it's probably a frequency that 50 plus years of rocking have eliminated from his spectrum. He doesn't even care. This is when I start to understand.

It's like buying an HDTV with FANTASTIC infrared clarity.

/Barnum was off by 59 seconds.

Joel, do you hear something odd? Something unpleasant?

No.

A preponderance of bass, perhaps?

No.

Is this the way I left the equalizer?

No.

This is not a toy for you and your friends.

doublesecretprobation: or to anyone who doesn't know what "good" sound is, which is most of the population.

Kinda glad I don't. I save a hell of a lot of money that way.

Lando Lincoln: doublesecretprobation: or to anyone who doesn't know what "good" sound is, which is most of the population.

Kinda glad I don't. I save a hell of a lot of money that way.

Some people would say it's worth the money to fly to Madrid to see a Velazquez in person than to just look at prints in a magazine instead.

El Chode: Some people would say it's worth the money to fly to Madrid to see a Velazquez in person than to just look at prints in a magazine instead.

And some people don't have that kind of money to blow no matter how much they think it would be worth it. Some people just found out that not all of their children qualify for the $1,000 tax break since their child turned 17 last year. Some people just shelled out an extra grand for taxes that they weren't planning on and are rather bitter today.

Not mentioning any names, mind you...

Lando Lincoln: And some people don't have that kind of money to blow no matter how much they think it would be worth it. Some people just found out that not all of their children qualify for the $1,000 tax break since their child turned 17 last year. Some people just shelled out an extra grand for taxes that they weren't planning on and are rather bitter today.

Not mentioning any names, mind you...

Oh I hear you. I'm talking on pure theory here. All I can afford is an iPod and a sony component stereo from 1993 as I sink myself $130,000 into student loan debt.

Still, just because you can't afford it doesn't mean it's not a justifiable interest.

alywa: I had a friend growing up whose dad was a huge audiophile.

Funny thing is, for how good the system sounded, I hardly ever saw him in there listening.

My family may say the same thing about me. Thing is, I listen when they're all out of the house. Because if they're home, I get pulled away. Every time.


El Chode: This article could go one step further and show why the mp3 is killing music in another way: the destruction of the album format.

Oh so very much this.


HotLonelyTeenageGirl: Look, I will throw this out there. Lately I have been grabbing multi-channel 24/96 FLACs of extracted MLP audio from DVD-A discs.

EIP me, dude.

Lando Lincoln: doublesecretprobation: or to anyone who doesn't know what "good" sound is, which is most of the population.

Kinda glad I don't. I save a hell of a lot of money that way.

I have to agree with this, even though I'm someone who appreciates high audio fidelity. I went to demo some stuff and made the mistake of saying "let me hear the expensive one, just so I know it isn't worth buying."

/walked out with the expensive one

Most people calling themselves audiophiles are merely flattering themselves, but if you enjoy what you're doing, who am I to say you can't enjoy your hobby?

Earguy: My family may say the same thing about me. Thing is, I listen when they're all out of the house. Because if they're home, I get pulled away. Every time.

Or "TURN THAT SHIAT DOWN!"

R.A.Danny: Most people calling themselves audiophiles are merely flattering themselves, but if you enjoy what you're doing, who am I to say you can't enjoy your hobby?

this.

I used to be an "album" listener... had a great car stereo and a nice, but simple home setup (Klipsch towers, NAD amp and pre-amp, Marantz CD player, Technics turntable, decent cabling)... back when I actually had the luxury of time to sit down and listen to a whole album. Nowadays...

HK 5.1 with polk in wall / ceiling speakers, 3 zones. Music almost always mp3 via Airtunes, controlled by my iPhone. All the CDs are put away, LPs and 45s are in boxes. Why? Convenience and kids. Having a 4 year old and a newborn will really kill the time you get to sit down and really "listen" to music... instead it is background for cooking, cleaning, entertaining, sitting on the porch, etc. Oh, blu-rays sound great on the system, and the wife is happy that there is minimal "tech junk" in the living room.

I don't think I'm unique. Great stereo systems are really cool for those who have the time, space, and desire... for the rest of us, music makes up the background of our lives, not the focal point itself. I listen to far more music today than I used to, just in a different way.

R.A.Danny: Most people calling themselves audiophiles are merely flattering themselves, but if you enjoy what you're doing, who am I to say you can't enjoy your hobby?

Dude, this is the internet. You can call them whatever you want and 50% of the people will call you a hero while the other 50% will call you a dick for criticizing them in the least.

audiophooles are just that.... morons with too much money....

Yes, vinyl is far superior to CDs or anything digital, but one does not have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have a great system.

Superior music can be had for under $1K.

real shaman: audiophooles are just that.... morons with too much money....

Yes, vinyl is far superior to CDs or anything digital, but one does not have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have a great system.

Superior music can be had for under $1K.

And somebody with an $99 ipod will call you stupid for spending that much. Everyone has a level.

50mm: And somebody with an $99 ipod will call you stupid for spending that much. Everyone has a level.

And someone with a non-iPod mp3 player will call everyone else an idiot for using something so proprietary and over-priced from apple.

50mm: And somebody with an $99 ipod will call you stupid for spending that much. Everyone has a level.

And at some point the room is the bottleneck.

Anyone with > $5k in a system without a listening room that is starting to look like a recording studio, is putting their money in the wrong place.

El Chode: 50mm: And somebody with an $99 ipod will call you stupid for spending that much. Everyone has a level.

And someone with a non-iPod mp3 player will call everyone else an idiot for using something so proprietary and over-priced from apple.

Ah, the cycle of life. Reminds me of all the nerd rage at my old job.

Forgot to add:

deathmatch-monster-cables-vs-a-coat-hanger (new window)

I've spent too much time at metal shows and too much time infront of bass bins at Raves and spent too much time listening to dubbed Tom Waits cassettes on mono tape-players to even care.


Good music is always gonna be good.

Epitome of extreme audiophile stupidity found HERE (new window)

I'm all for investing in good equipment that faithfully represents the original recording as closely as possible, but when you start dropping $500 on FARKING WOODEN KNOBS THAT MAKE YOUR SHIAT SOUND BETTER you have a problem..

I'm glad radio is dying a quick death, too. Maybe now when someone engineers a CD they won't mix it so compressed that all the sound is squeezed into a 5khz band in the center channel, just to make it as "loud" as possible.

El Chode:
If I remember correctly, most CD player lasers can't read the full bit rate on the CD, or at the very least, some data is lost each time you transfer a song, which is an essential premise of my argument.

Um, that's not entirely accurate. 44/16 PCM is 44/16 PCM. Now, you might very well have a laser which is prone to jitter, and you might very well have really shiatty D/A converters, and you could also have a laser that isn't reading the pits as well as it should, relying on the CRC checking a little bit too much. But no, on a technical level, all CD lasers play PCM 44/16... there's not really a bitrate persay (as we think of it today), as it's all just linear PCM data. Honestly, it's 1979 technology. Fairly antiquated, comparatively.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: Um, that's not entirely accurate. 44/16 PCM is 44/16 PCM. Now, you might very well have a laser which is prone to jitter, and you might very well have really shiatty D/A converters, and you could also have a laser that isn't reading the pits as well as it should, relying on the CRC checking a little bit too much. But no, on a technical level, all CD lasers play PCM 44/16... there's not really a bitrate persay (as we think of it today), as it's all just linear PCM data. Honestly, it's 1979 technology. Fairly antiquated, comparatively.

I thought the reason why we had the special 5.1 CD players and what not was because they had a better laser that could read more bits at once or something.

I'm no expert, so I'll take your word for this though

by swapping out a $2,600 AC power cable for a $4,000 one becomes a justifiable end. We did exactly that, and I strained to hear any difference at all (more impressions of our test will follow later in the week), but to Fremer, the difference was abundantly clear-not necessarily better with the more expensive cable, but different, a warmer, fuller sound, as Fremer described it.

Fremer is full of shiat. I'd bet real money he would be completely unable to tell the difference in sound quality in a scientifically controlled test.


The point is, people like Fremer can not only hear the difference, they crave it. I walked into his listening room expecting to discern absolutely zero difference in the comparison tests we had planned, swapping out speaker cables that cost as much as a meal at the best restaurant in New York for another set that cost as much as a year of undergrad at Harvard. I actually did hear a tiny difference.


Riiiiiiiight.


I love music-- Really listening to music with my eyes closed and full attention, discovering all the subtle details in a good work of music art. I deeply wish I could afford better equipment than my current modest setup.

In the end, though, there's only so much audio information you can wring out of a SACD or record. And spending $4000 on a power cord isn't going to improve anything.

Riche: In the end, though, there's only so much audio information you can wring out of a SACD or record. And spending $4000 on a power cord isn't going to improve anything.

Next up: Audiophile nutjob spends hundreds of millions of dollars building his own power source, driven by a custom steam generator, fueled by locks of hair harvested from a cloned Jimi Hendrix, and steam collected from the nutsack sweat of a cloned Beethoven.

Because you can hear the difference.

Riche: A nice collection of audiophile snake oil

What a load of shiat! (new window)

If I had no morals I'd jump on the supplier-side of this scam-wagon!

El Chode: HotLonelyTeenageGirl: Um, that's not entirely accurate. 44/16 PCM is 44/16 PCM. Now, you might very well have a laser which is prone to jitter, and you might very well have really shiatty D/A converters, and you could also have a laser that isn't reading the pits as well as it should, relying on the CRC checking a little bit too much. But no, on a technical level, all CD lasers play PCM 44/16... there's not really a bitrate persay (as we think of it today), as it's all just linear PCM data. Honestly, it's 1979 technology. Fairly antiquated, comparatively.

I thought the reason why we had the special 5.1 CD players and what not was because they had a better laser that could read more bits at once or something.

I'm no expert, so I'll take your word for this though

SACD is not the same as a standard CD, although like DVD and CD it uses a red laser. SACD uses a protocol/codec called "DSD" for encoding the data. It's not actually PCM. DVD-A is just a part of the DVD spec that allows you to store PCM multichannel audio, as well as what's called "MLP" (Meridian Lossless Packing - or "LPCM"). MLP is a lossless format similar to FLAC or DTS.

Basically, the way an audio CD looks to a player is it basically sees an index, and then a stream of data with Reid-Solomon ECC. It's one of the reasons why a data CD is different than an Audio CD. Basically as far as a DVD goes, however encrypted, whatever you want - it's just a data disk with a ton of files.

Being somewhat basic here, but you get the gist.

doublesecretprobation: cameroncrazy1984: A $350,000 stereo system isn't going to sound any better than a $350 one in the right room.

or to anyone who doesn't know what "good" sound is, which is most of the population.

What, exactly, is "good" sound? I keep hearing this from "audiophiles." It appears to be very subjective, which most likely means that you guys are just kidding yourselves.