Master's thesis on Audiophilia

[JoeESP9]

I think being an audiophile and liking to listen to music a lot are two different things.

That I do not agree with. I think they go hand in hand. Although there are those few who have 10 LP's and a $200,000 system. The vast majority of audiophiles have respectable music collections. That indicates a certain amount of, "liking to listen to music". Conversely being a music lover doesn't necessarily mean one is an audiophile.

 

[+48V]

That I do not agree with. I think they go hand in hand. Although there are those few who have 10 LP's and a $200,000 system. The vast majority of audiophiles have respectable music collections. That indicates a certain amount of, "liking to listen to music". Conversely being a music lover doesn't necessarily mean one is an audiophile.

Correct me, but it looks to me like you just agreed with the post you just disagreed with.

 

[tannyhoban]

Oh yeah, and funny how only on AK are those who are rabid about their audio reproduction are scorned by members. I can't think if any site with another hobby where those who strive to be on the leading edge are held in derision by their other hobbyists. Now there may be disagreement on methods and procedures, but not what we see by certain groups here. That is unless you have a room full of mid tier receivers and turntables from the 70's and 80's. Somehow that becomes a shrine or a mecca.

Pffft.

Regards
Mister Pig

I dunno, I can remember a couple of the early golf forums that were far worse. Everyone seeks their own level.

I choose to audiophile vicariously through the folks who contribute with their knowledge and experience, including one very discerning barnyard inhabitant.

I'm sure its tough taking guff from those that project their bias on those who have gone beyond that to actually experiencing the leading edge of the curve.

Always a pleasure reading your quests.

 

[Bkphoto]

may add some distortion

we can't have distortion...!:nono:

 

[chicks]

I don't find it controversial, I do find it somewhat belittling. My wife doesn't buy any gear, she hasn't purchased a cd or album in 20 years, yet she has her favorite system, has her favorite volume level for different activities, and loves to sing with Mary Chapin Carpenter and Lucinda Williams.

There are many, many more passive audiophiles than people here are willing to credit. Guilt by association.

The paper's author is female, FWIW.

http://sfu.academia.edu/KellyHeward

 

[mfrench]

my favorite is the Audiophiles Wife:
http://www.theaudiophileswife.com

I proudly wear the freak flag of audiophilia.

 

[SA-708]

Oh yeah, and funny how only on AK are those who are rabid about their audio reproduction are scorned by members. I can't think if any site with another hobby where those who strive to be on the leading edge are held in derision by their other hobbyists. Now there may be disagreement on methods and procedures, but not what we see by certain groups here. That is unless you have a room full of mid tier receivers and turntables from the 70's and 80's. Somehow that becomes a shrine or a mecca.

Pffft.

Regards
Mister Pig

Per the author's definition, myself and many others here on this forum are not audiophiles. In particular, one group that is found here in great numbers, that she failed to identify, is the "audio collector." I fall into that category (with over 50 p-mount cartridges) as well as what she identifies as a "vinylphile" and a "serious music listener." As someone who does not tweak, customize, nor modify my equipment, I fail to meet her definition of an audiophile.

I don't denigrate the audiophiles, I just avoid conversations about things like interconnects. Mine are all AR and Radio Shack. On the other hand, I was quite puzzled by someone here who claimed to not like Iron & Wine's debut LP because it is a low fidelity home demo quality recording, while I can adore the songwriting and performance in spite of that, even thinking the hiss might add to the intimacy and charm.

Reading this thesis helped me understand why I approach what I do with audio equipment and music so differently than some others here on AK, in spite of the fact that she called my masculinity into question.

 

[chicks]

As usual, you've missed the point entirely, posit. Why do you bother?

Can't imagine how anyone can find her writing skills in any way lacking. Quite an easy read, which flows well.

Apparent above is that audiophiles are not homogenous in their ways of thinking,
yet one thing that is valorised amongst all enthusiasts is knowledge. While I have decided
not to classify the subjects used in this analysis as golden ears and meter readers,
Perlman’s distinction is useful for illustrating the veneration of different types of
knowledge in high-end audio culture. The objective/subjective approach is extended to
the acquisition of cultural capital in audiophilia. ‘Objective’ knowledge favours scientific
reasoning and engineering specifications whilst ‘subjective’ knowledge is based on
experiential observations and trial and error testing.

...suffice it to say that all audiophiles possess a wealth of information regarding equipment
and modes of listening.


...The audiophile accrues knowledge over time through his involvement in the high-
end community and through his own experience with his gear. Audiophile knowledge is
learned through participation and is not easily gleaned from books. A defining
characteristic of the audiophile is that he questions everything; there is no blind
acceptance of facts. This can be evidenced in the extensive letters sections in both TAS
and Stereophile.xi
Readers regularly question positions taken by the contributors,
disparaging or raving about equipment reviews, or presenting ‘discoveries’ that they
believe will revolutionize high-end audio culture.

 

[SA-708]

I found the article very limited in scope, with the science very general, with vague terms, with little or no understanding, and misleading at best. Can't blame her though since she has no electronics engineering and has to rely on either heresay or some one else's opinion.

She's a sociologist. Her science is Not engineering or physics or mathematics (my field). Her textual analysis of audio publications isn't invalid, just different.

 

[+48V]

I think he should have taken an English class or two before writing that. Those are some fairly awkward sentences. I do not seeing it scoring many points with the academic crowd.

Regards
Mister Pig

Oh yeah, and funny how only on AK are those who are rabid about their audio reproduction are scorned by members. I can't think if any site with another hobby where those who strive to be on the leading edge are held in derision by their other hobbyists. Now there may be disagreement on methods and procedures, but not what we see by certain groups here. That is unless you have a room full of mid tier receivers and turntables from the 70's and 80's. Somehow that becomes a shrine or a mecca.

Pffft.

Regards
Mister Pig

Mr. Pig! Your omnipresent cheeky, flowery, and corny posts here make me smile big mate. Many cause me to think (rut) a tad deeper; below the natural fertilizer and yellow sprinkler what poisons many threads. Thanks for that. :thmbsp:

In my happenstance experience here, you typically shine on with an even heel and fairly clean clean hooves. But this one struck me uncharacteristic of AK's most loveable swine.

Did you move from the pin to a glass house? Are you now cooking your diet in a black kettle? Wha'd I know?

Call me cornfused and say it ain't so.

 

[chicks]

More...

For Holt, elitism is the driving force behind excellence. Holt maintains that a listener can
certainly attain musical pleasure from a sub-standard system, but audiophilia is more than
just a pleasurable musical experience, it is about sonic perfection. Since cost often
reflects excellence, expensive gear is justified as the primary focus of the audiophile.
Holt will not apologize for this; in fact he revels in it, noting, “quality costs, and the
highest quality costs the most” (Stereophile, 8.1, 1985, p. 6).

 

[chicks]

Mr. Pig! Your omnipresent cheeky, flowery, and corny posts here make me smile big mate. Many cause me to think (rut) a tad deeper; below the natural fertilizer and yellow sprinkler what poisons many threads. Thanks for that. :thmbsp:

QFT. Mr. Pig's projects are always a joy to follow, and the barnyard humor is icing on the cake! :thmbsp:

 

[Bkphoto]

so does this paper make me an a$$hole...?

 

[SoCal Sam]

What was this, a post graduate thesis? Could she have been awarded a Masters or (gulp) a doctorate for this?

One thing for certain is that any sound that is perceived through our ears is open to subjective interpretation. There can be no absolute position taken which makes defining or even categorizing our behavior a fool's errand. Has anyone ever proven or disproven wire and interconnect claims? Has anyone ever won the subjective/objective debate. Analog v. Digital? Tubes v. Solid State? Nope. It will never happen because personal preference is in play.

 

[Bigerik]

Which means she does not understand what she is writing in technical terms. Please re-read my post again. I only objected to her comments concerning science. The science she presents is very limited in scope and inaccurate. Here are some quotes from page 12-15.


Maybe a few do due to SS devices being used in the analog stages. She attempts to clump all digital together. However, 24/96 and especially DSD are outstanding and very analog. Next.


Pick the worse examples. By the way, who does that? A few maybe. And who places pennies on drivers?? I don't know of any over 20 years on the internet. By the way, putting a penny on the dust cover lowers the FS and alters other parameters.


That is interesting since I have had to deal with some here and on other forums claiming "science"/science types but who cannot post a single piece of science. So the science types seem to be in the same boat.


This is really interesting from a couple of points.
1) Since when can science measure the difference between -50.000db and -50.0005db. The instruments will not do it.
2) Some testing, such as dbt/abx is flawed, not addressing variable confounds except sight.
Secondly, the medical community is not consulted for proper controls, methodologies. The tests are skewed towards no sonic difference, or even rigged. Third, Who funds many if not most of the dbt/abx tests?


Anyone who has been around here much has seen the so called few "scientific" types who cannot produce one piece of scientific evidence or
basic electronic engineering. The diyers and us kinda know who the
"scientific" types are.


I have never heard anyone state that. It is difficult to tell what she read or understands since she isn't quoting, and does not understand electronics. Maybe someone wanted to alter the parameters, such as Fs, Qts etc. But it is a stupid and degrading comment to generalize to all audiophiles.


Then Perlman does not understand what he is talking about. How does one measure the effects of DA and ESR in a capacitor? Not with a scope or distortion analyzer. How does one measure the difference between -50.0000db and -50.0005db.

There are more degrading comments. As I posted before, read the links I posted last post for multiple problems in designs.

Cheers
Pos

Interesting read. Thanks!

 

[SA-708]

Pos, I don't have to reread anything to understand that you stlll have missed the point. She doesn't have to understand technology to analyze what others have written about technology. She's writing about people, the way the writers in two audiophile magazines approach this hobby of ours, not things. Gotta wonder what she'd make of you.

Time to flip the LP over and get on with this evening.

 

[SoCal Sam]

Pos, I don't have to reread anything to understand that you stlll have missed the point. She doesn't have to understand technology to analyze what others have written about technology. She's writing about people, the way the writers in two audiophile magazines approach this hobby of ours, not things. Gotta wonder what she'd make of you.

Time to flip the LP over and get on with this evening.

She cannot deny the chicken that laid the egg. You need technology to have audio reproduction. Both disciplines have a place at the table.

 

[chicks]

Pos, I don't have to reread anything to understand that you stlll have missed the point. She doesn't have to understand technology to analyze what others have written about technology. She's writing about people, the way the writers in two audiophile magazines approach this hobby of ours, not things. Gotta wonder what she'd make of you.

.

Indeed.

Sigh. It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion here. Off to the Harbeth forums, where rational people are in charge.

 

[SA-708]

I'm really enjoying this new self-titled Wire LP on first listen.

 

[bluesky]

I'll read it on a rainy day with nothing to do.

Thanks.