What makes Audiophile?

Well, this is another tip your toe into the swamp and get chomped by an alligator topic.

You will get as many opinions as their are members on this board.
Its good to hear them though, I think its great to hear what other folks put into this hobby and why.
 
Perhaps the last couple posters misunderstood what I was saying or I was not clear. Certainly no Realistic, or any piece of equipment from the 70's is up to the specs of today's high end equipment. I was referring to house brands vs name brands such as Pioneer, Sansui etc of that era. Perception was a very large component.
 
Why does the TT have two tonearms?

The Fidelity Research FR-64S is a high mass arm is for my Ortofon SPU and FR-7 carts..... Both very low compliance carts. The FR-14 is a medium mass arm for just about everything else. Beats finding the space for multiple tables. My wife limits me to two tables :(
 
Last edited:
The Fidelity Research FR-64S arm is for my Ortofon SPU and FR-7 carts..... Both very low compliance carts. The FR-14 arm is for everything else. Beats finding the space for multiple tables

Thanks for the explanation. I've never seen such a setup. VERY cool.
 
Thanks for the explanation. I've never seen such a setup. VERY cool.

I've seen people mount 4 arms to a table but that would make for some seriously fiddly operation so I restrict myself to two per table..... Although I'd love to get my Mayware Formula 4 mounted on there too for really high compliance carts like ADC etc. That'll likely end up on my JVC TT-71 instead.
 
Last edited:
I've always considered an audiophile someone who enjoys listening to recorded music played back in the most pleasing way to their ear.
There are a million different ways to set up a system and just as many opinions on what is the right way to do it. Just having that opinion makes you an audiophile IMO.
 
So, tomorrow, I have to decide which of these to listen to; The center most wide-ORTF pair, or, the wider 40" spread omni pair.
Right now, they're mixing down in a four channel to stereo blender.
From a couple of hours ago.
It looks like the conductors music stand is rising right from my mic stand, no?
I'm actually out at 2nd row dead f..... center (DFC).
DSCN4157.jpg
DSCN4173.jpg

When did being an audiophile become a bad thing?
I'm Mike. I'm an audiophile. I got it something fierce.


You can decide for yourself which turned out better,... I gave up on it:
https://archive.org/details/PowaySymphonyOrchestra?and[]=date:2017-11-19*
 
Last edited:
I guess I'm a snob, I wouldn't buy that equipment then nor today, just because it's old doesn't make it good. Just because you think it's good doesn't make others that don't a snob. In fact that was a snob comment you put to paper generalizing peoples choices as a character trait of the individual.


Yea, funny thing is he is pretty much right though. :) :) :)
 
I guess I'm a snob, I wouldn't buy that equipment then nor today, just because it's old doesn't make it good. Just because you think it's good doesn't make others that don't a snob. In fact that was a snob comment you put to paper generalizing peoples choices as a character trait of the individual.

I'm in complete agreement with you. I've never understood the fascination some have with Japanese receivers that I passed on when they were new.
 
An audiophile in the 70's was someone who would not consider equipment by Realistic, MCS, Lafayette etc... Now we have found that some of that equipment was as good or better than the audiophile grade stuff.
"Now we've found?"

Surely you're not suggesting that Lafayette and Radio Shack offered the same audio quality as gear from companies like Audio Research, Conrad-Johnson, Threshold, Dayton-Wright, Mark Levinson, Stax, etc.
 
"Now we've found?"

Surely you're not suggesting that Lafayette and Radio Shack offered the same audio quality as gear from companies like Audio Research, Conrad-Johnson, Threshold, Dayton-Wright, Mark Levinson, Stax, etc.

I remember reading the review on some of the top receivers during the 1970’s, the Realistic STA-225 was rated better than the best Fisher had at the time. So it would take a physical comparison to actually know if any of the newer equipment even measures up to the receivers made back then. I think that anyone should find that interesting...
 
IME most audiophiles during that era never considered any receiver. It was then as it is now. Audiophiles tend to buy separates.

If you are review oriented take note that neither Stereophile or The Absolute Sound reviewed receivers.
 
I remember reading the review on some of the top receivers during the 1970’s, the Realistic STA-225 was rated better than the best Fisher had at the time.
That's not saying a lot for that era. "The Fisher" brand had fallen behind by then.

An Audio Research SP-6 with D-150 or say a Mark Levinson JC-2 with a Threshold 800A are in a different performance category altogether than a Radio Shack receiver.
 
Last edited:
I'm in complete agreement with you. I've never understood the fascination some have with Japanese receivers that I passed on when they were new.

It's nostalgia mostly I'd have to say. Same reason people collect classic cars.
At least most receivers sound decent. Most classic cars drive like lawn tractors and would lose to a new V6 Camry in a drag race.

Edit: to be fair I have some vintage stereo gear and a '65 Harley
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom