What makes Audiophile?

The OP asked what makes a piece of equipment "audiophile level or standards".

It was answered by the first reply, and that answer is Audiophiles.

Not collective, but individuals. Not decided by reviewers, manufacturers or marketers. An audiophile can make up his own mind if something is "audiophile standard" (after all- it is he who is the audiophile) and the independent thinkers (lots around here) don't give a rat's a#$ what anyone else thinks.

The word barely existed until the late 1980s when it was stolen from the true audiophiles (guys who like/built/tested and played with HiFi gear) and used as an evil way of separating them from the posers, wannabe reviewers and people who thought they could buy a hobby and have the best gear on the block etc.

Here's a cool graphic ('cos audiophiles love graphs) on the word's usage:

audiophile.JPG

Honestly, I think the term has run its course. It is certainly not a badge of honour, it is fast becoming the opposite IMO. I never use it in reference to myself or my gear. I am vintage audio technician and serious restorer who also loves music.

Audiophile, no thanks - it sounds too much like the other 'phile' despised by the entire population.

:)
 
Last edited:
To give a comparison, here's another graphic of "compact disc" word usage in print:

compact disc.JPG

The reference peak is 1992. Interesting. Corresponding around the peak sales for CD.

Here's another of my favourites. Soundstage as one word, not the film term of two words. The single word is an audiophile modern invention IMO.

soundstage.JPG

Not wanting to hijack the thread, but I would say there is no doubt, we have reached 'peak audiophile' a while ago. Thanks to the UK HiFi press it lasted perhaps a little too long. :)
 
Last edited:
Being in the commercial and retail sound business. I've know musicians with highly trained ears that didn't give a flip about the price of the equipment. They were more interested in the quality of the performance, accuracy of the recording and the ability of a sound system to produce that accuracy. A true audio phile is more interested in creating a certain sound in his home than he is the price of the equipment. That said they will spend more money than most if they feel a particular piece is the only way they can achieve the sound they want. A lot of them will give up the bass below 50 hz or so as they feel it masks the more important frequencies above. Some prefer a full range speaker driver that doesn't use crossover, tweeters or woofers. Some prefer point source speaker systems, others prefer highly directive speakers to eliminate room interferences. The list of preferences just goes on. Some have no clue what a true live un-amplified performance sounds like. Others are almost as sophisticated as trained classical musicians. Pop enthusiasts are not to be discounted either, but they are more easily influenced by a particular group of electronically created rather than natural acoustical sounds. Some have perfect pitch, others have trained them selves to be aware of particular anomalies. Some can sense very small amounts of wow and flutter, pitch irregularities, poor transitions between drivers, lack of a system to maintain pitch as sound transitions from one driver to another, some want extra air in their recording reproduction, and others hate any form of intermodulation distortion but will tolerate vast amount of harmonic distortion. Some want very rapid dry transient response others want to replicate the space of large halls or intimate dinner clubs. There are as many preferences and opinions as there are individual audiophiles. Examples: some folks love Klipsch La Scalas, others Quad or KLH electrostatics. Talk about two extremes.
 
I want a copy! :) seriously. :)

fine sir,... my pleasure.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/sj9i3qb4by6wfxr/turkey-day_mp3.mp3?dl=0

And a visual:
index.php
 
Last edited:
Yep....

People get the meaning of high fidelity and audiophile mixed up, then those looking to make money selling audio equipment use the phrase audiophile as a catch phrase denoting quality. A true audiophile loves the sound that comes from living and experiencing life. It’s about taking time to smell and listen to life as it is happening, to the sound of birds, animals and waterfalls to the sound of foghorns on foggy nights. There was music long before there was equipment. There were guitars across the backs cowboys to ease the tensions of all those concerned to include the cattle. People had been listening to orchestra music for hundreds of years prior to the invention of electronics.

When it comes to the technical aspects of equipment a person should read about equipment and not just wonder what they have as far as quality goes. You can’t just throw allot of money at the prospect and hope you hit some mark of excellence.

Audiophile is a term used in relation to music reproduction. Loving the sound of live music, or of the natural world, does not make one an audiophile. Many music lovers are not audiophiles. What does make someone an audiophile is arguable, but it is always about music (or sound) playback via recordings. Some believe that audiophiles tune their ears with live concerts, and use that as the paradigm for what they seek at home.
 
That is awesome- I love it. Did you prod them every now and then to get them to go nuts? I like how you're talking to the turkeys...

Those onboard mics are great huh?

mmm. Christmas dinner is coming up... :)
 
The OP asked what makes a piece of equipment "audiophile level or standards".

It was answered by the first reply, and that answer is Audiophiles.

Not collective, but individuals. Not decided by reviewers, manufacturers or marketers. An audiophile can make up his own mind if something is "audiophile standard" (after all- it is he who is the audiophile) and the independent thinkers (lots around here) don't give a rat's a#$ what anyone else thinks.

The word barely existed until the late 1980s when it was stolen from the true audiophiles (guys who like/built/tested and played with HiFi gear) and used as an evil way of separating them from the posers, wannabe reviewers and people who thought they could buy a hobby and have the best gear on the block etc.

Here's a cool graphic ('cos audiophiles love graphs) on the word's usage:

View attachment 1050036

Honestly, I think the term has run its course. It is certainly not a badge of honour, it is fast becoming the opposite IMO. I never use it in reference to myself or my gear. I am vintage audio technician and serious restorer who also loves music.

Audiophile, no thanks - it sounds too much like the other 'phile' despised by the entire population.

:)
No. Initially, an audiophile was identified as such by others, not by themselves. It was not an invention or declaration by the those in question, but a description attributed, quietly accepted by such. You are mistaken.
 
I once read a line in a UK HiFi Magazine review which has stuck in my head ever since.

Something like "This XXX piece of kit is a cheap entry ticket to the audiophile playground..." The connotations were ugly, elitist and snobbish.

Essentially: "You can't come and play here without at least a cheap ticket, someone will check your entry pass, and you won't get to play on all the rides, or hang out with the cool guys, but it's better than nothing- considering how low your budget is".
 
Connotations' origin is not exclusive, as you have affirmed. Once a convention is established, it's framework is up for debate. However, I remember the belittlement. But it was not by the 'audiophiles' but by the designators. Clearly a marketing ploy by those and others you've mentioned. I appreciated the gear, but not the attitude.
 
The UK press succeeded in some ways, by arbitrarily bestowing 'budget audiophile status' on pieces of home grown 'kit' and eschewing other high performing well made gear, often relegating said gear to 'also-ran' status and simply a 'Far Eastern offering' type of designation.

It is indeed ironic that their myopic views positioned them perfectly to commentate and view, at close quarters, the collapse and sell off of 'their' iconic brands to 'Far Eastern' interests.

By creating and nurturing an elitist, exclusive term, the equipment approvals process, and indoctrinating their followers with what they 'should' have, I think they've alienated a huge proportion of people who just loved music and HiFi gear. I haven't bought or read a UK HiFi magaize since about 2004 when they reached 'peak stupidity'. I look back at some of the dribble they wrote now and wonder what they were thinking.

I could be wrong, but I didn't see such a level of bias in US magazines, they realised the playground was big enough for everyone to play, regardless of how fat their wallet was.
 
I don't think Hi-Fi means too much. I had little pocket transister radios when I was a kid and they all said Hi-Fi on them. Seems like they were all 6 transister AM radios

It's like an Organic tag on a piece of fruit. Watered down!
 
The UK press succeeded in some ways, by arbitrarily bestowing 'budget audiophile status' on pieces of home grown 'kit' and eschewing other high performing well made gear, often relegating said gear to 'also-ran' status and simply a 'Far Eastern offering' type of designation.

It is indeed ironic that their myopic views positioned them perfectly to commentate and view, at close quarters, the collapse and sell off of 'their' iconic brands to 'Far Eastern' interests.

By creating and nurturing an elitist, exclusive term, the equipment approvals process, and indoctrinating their followers with what they 'should' have, I think they've alienated a huge proportion of people who just loved music and HiFi gear. I haven't bought or read a UK HiFi magaize since about 2004 when they reached 'peak stupidity'. I look back at some of the dribble they wrote now and wonder what they were thinking.

I could be wrong, but I didn't see such a level of bias in US magazines, they realised the playground was big enough for everyone to play, regardless of how fat their wallet was.
The only equipment I see advertised or labeled audiophile is junk and they put that name and labeling on it to sell to the idiot.
 
It seems like this discussion has wound down and most who will chime in have.
Earlier I posted what I thought I learned from this thread. Well, I found I have changed my mind a bit.

As far as equipment goes, any manufacturer can put a label of hi-fi or audiophile on their equipment with no legal repercussions. If you want good equipment: know what you want your system to do then ask around for advice.

As far as people, audiophile is a label. And like any label it brings up images and opinions in people's minds, for good or bad. After pondering a bit I remember as a kid in the 70s seeing my uncle's reel to reel, turntable and glowing tubes. I remember him telling me why he used what he did. This created in my mind what an audiophile is. Others may have heard the opinions of some people and decided that audiophiles are snobs. Any preconceived notion of a labeled person is based in some level of fact.

There will always be labels and always be preconceptions surrounding them. The best thing you can do, if you fall into a generalized label, is not push your opinion on others but be ready to intelligently explain it if questioned. I believe that has been accomplished well in this thread.

You guys are truly awesome.
 
Last edited:
If you care about build quality, sound quality, and exclusivity, you might be an audiophile.(it's a grey area, not sure if it's ok to call yourself one or if it only counts if someone else calls you that). If you put someone down, or look down on them for their gear or opinions, you're a snob. It's not that hard, we all have our biases. And there are snobs in any hobby you can name. I don't really care.

My GEAR is mid-fi. The SOUND is hi-fi. As it should be. Hi, my name is JED, and I am an audiophile. I think....
 
Back
Top Bottom