• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Vintage Fisher Tube stuff . . . audiophile or not?

Audiophile, Hi end, Hi fidelity. These terms mean different things and may or may not overlap into each other.
Hi Fidelity, was a term coined in the 1950s which was used to distinguish audio equipment (tube amplifiers) that were able to reproduce sound frequency for 20 to 20,000 hz within specified distortion numbers. And with the rapidly growing home audio market, the term helped to fuel the audio design and power competition , as manufacturers like Leak, Williamson, McIntosh, Ampex, later, Fisher and Scott, Harman Kardon, Marantz, etc, tried to seperate themselves from the competition with better distortion or power output numbers.
Audiophile, is a person who literally loves audio or reproduced music. So, any vintage tube audio equipment that reproduces a sound that someone loves can be considered "audiophile". This could also be true for modern solid state equipment too. But, in the context of audio magazines, and audio forums, audiophile connotes a more dedicated follower almost obsessed. Media and advertising has used the term to influence people which has further resulted in the term acquiring a monetary component.
Hi end is therefore the moneyed aspect where the more it costs the "higher the audiophile quotient" can be. Thus, people can become instant audiophiles with the purchase of the proper equipment as recommended by magazines, price tags, or sales people.
Unfortunately, our ears or auditory perception is not linked to an oscilloscope or distortion meter and in the final analysis your brain is the final arbiter as to what constitutes an excellent sounding equipment or not. And once the brain is involved the decision making process becomes much more complex. And all the demos, discussions, forum fights, prices, and recommendations, will need to be resolved by your own choices balancing all the different factors.
 
Last edited:
And then there's the pejorative..."Audiophile" as someone who likes their equipment more than they like music.

Not a definitely I subscribe to, but since we're talking about the terms..
 
Last edited:
And then there's the pejorative..."Audiophile" as someone who likes their equipment more than they like music.

Not a definitely I subscribe to, but since we're talking about the terms..
Those tend to be some of the folks that developed the good stuff for the music lovers.
 
I am sure the term was used before 1950 but i believe it was during that period that they established some measurable parameters which gave the term some credence.
 
Audio-phile is like pedo.
It's what we are warned to keep our kids away from.

As for the term "hi end" I am constantly amazed how deaf the people are, that claim to be able to hear what we as recording engineers can't.
 
It's funny, I met one of my friends awhile ago and he like above is a recording engineer as well, and
we started discussing hi-end audio and started to laugh saying in the recording studio we use what
ever cables we have at the studio, but these Hi-end audio guy's use $1000.00 and up cables all over
their systems he just could not figure it out??
 
It's funny, I met one of my friends awhile ago and he like above is a recording engineer as well, and
we started discussing hi-end audio and started to laugh saying in the recording studio we use what
ever cables we have at the studio, but these Hi-end audio guy's use $1000.00 and up cables all over
their systems he just could not figure it out??

But a recording studio is a business with other concerns.
 
But a recording studio is a business with other concerns.
I don't work in a studio and I have measured calibrated hearing.
I don't think I know many people that even know how acute or otherwise their hearing is, especially at threshold.
 
Sound is subjective whether you are a listener, an engineer or a musician.

Luckily what you just wrote is complete nonsense.
I wonder what Michael Gerzon would have said about such a garbage statement like that.

Fortunately science has been heavily involved in Audio engineering since the very beginning, and it's represented today by universities, specialised institutes, acoustics specialists and many of them write long papers for the AES.
Did you know there is IRCAM in Paris, which has been working in spatial sound and research of computer algorithms for sound treatment for decades.

Objectivity and evaluation are what it's all about.
Just because you know nothing about the subject, doesn't mean you can lump highly qualified people together with people who are plain ignorant and proud to remain so.
 
There is a difference between the audio engineer and a guy who likes to listen to music. The guy who likes to listen may be after a particular sound, and that may or may not have any relation to accurate sound. Its the constant battle between the objective and the subjective. I can't think of how many times someone asks what sort of measurement equipment people use to check this or that, and you get a list of various pieces of equipment or measurement methods and a half dozen people saying "my ears". That pretty much sums it up I think.
 
There is a difference between the audio engineer and a guy who likes to listen to music. The guy who likes to listen may be after a particular sound, and that may or may not have any relation to accurate sound. Its the constant battle between the objective and the subjective. I can't think of how many times someone asks what sort of measurement equipment people use to check this or that, and you get a list of various pieces of equipment or measurement methods and a half dozen people saying "my ears". That pretty much sums it up I think.
http://hhscott.com/vonrecklinghausen.htm
 
I certainly don't disagree that at some level you have to listen to it. Its just not really possible to use "it sounds good" as an objective means of comparing things, especially when you're talking to another person. What I like may not be what you like. Measurements also don't necessarily mean better or worse, they simply indicate that A is not equal to B.
 
Luckily what you just wrote is complete nonsense.
I wonder what Michael Gerzon would have said about such a garbage statement like that.

Fortunately science has been heavily involved in Audio engineering since the very beginning, and it's represented today by universities, specialised institutes, acoustics specialists and many of them write long papers for the AES.
Did you know there is IRCAM in Paris, which has been working in spatial sound and research of computer algorithms for sound treatment for decades.

Objectivity and evaluation are what it's all about.
Just because you know nothing about the subject, doesn't mean you can lump highly qualified people together with people who are plain ignorant and proud to remain so.
Wow. It's not wise or mature to say such things about someone you don't know anything about. I'm familiar with the field, I'll leave it at that.
 
Back
Top Bottom