Erik Mandaville Posted June 11, 2007 Author Share Posted June 11, 2007 That's quite the list, Paul. What about someone yesterday who, while doing some single-minded thinking about a new idea for a DIY center channel, in distraction picked up an open can of enchilada sauce his wife was going to use for dinner -- and proceeded to take a couple of sips (okay, gulps) of the stuff, thinking it was his half-filled glass of Australian Shiraz? My wife had a good laugh, but the sauce was much better with the bubbling-hot cheese enchiladas freshly pulled from the oven! If this makes me not just an audiphile, but what has sometimes been referred to here as a *TRUE* audiphile, than it was worth it. Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 If, in your opinion the enchilada sauce changed the sound in some way then you are certainly a true audiophile. Try pasting some on the amp to really give the sound a kick... Thus far you qualify for distracted and absent minded - audiophilia or no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whell Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 I like the defenition Bob Crites uses in his signature.[] That is at least the meaning that some have affixed to the term. For whatever reason, the term "audiophile" has become rather inflammatory; in some cases, especially in this forum, it amounts to a slur which seems to be directed at those who invest an amount in their stereo (or whatever) which either exceeds or is perceived to exceed the forum average. Other acts which result in the scarlet letter include professing a belief that the use of certain components result in an improvement in the sound of one's system in the absence of quantifiable data confirming the same. These acts generally go hand in hand with the perception that the "audiophile" lacks either the ability or common sense (or both) to know any better. The irony, of course being that the "audiophile," in this scenario, is also perceived as being one who believes that he or she possesses some degree of refinement is his or her pursuit of audio reproduction. That, of course, is a corruption of the original definition, but represents the reality of the phrase in many many corners of the hobby (which is probably your point in asking the question). It is probably fair to ask whether that reflects more poorly on the audiophile or on the utterer of the phrase. Agree with this for the most part. The definition of the word "is what it is". The definition is meant to provide an objective description or standard. Our experiences and biases add color to the objective standard: sometimes positive, sometimes purjortive. Audiophile is often a word that gets colored with a pretty broad brush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted June 11, 2007 Author Share Posted June 11, 2007 "Thus far you qualify for distracted and absent minded - audiophilia or no." Gosh, Max. I was SO SURE that would be my ticket of admission. That such a thing would happen as a result of thinking about how I was going to integrate the woofer enclosure with the rest of the plasma TV shelf system was something I was sure would help me qualify. Okay, I'll go back and work on it some more. I saw some power cords advertised as costing only several hundred dollars for a 6 foot length. A bargain for any 'TRUE' audiophile. Or a three-foot-long pair of IC for....what was it.....something around $12,000? Here's the point: Time and time again we have statements made such as: "A 'TRUE' audiophile would never consider such a component as truly accurate." Or: "Any 'REAL' audiphile knows that such a speaker design is nothing but a source of distortion, regardless of how good it may sound." Or: "An audiophile would not trade or sell his or her big tube amp with heavy black transformers for something so comparatively cheap and toy-like." Thus my question (absent minded or distracted or not -- which has some truth to it, I admit): If a 'TRUE' and/or 'REAL' audiophile would or would not do such an assortment of audio-related things, what must one do in order to qualify? What needs to be on the resume'? The use of 'Audiophile-Grade' power cords, capacitors, and spiked isolation equipment? Are you still on a quest for 901 drivers? Those things are nothing but distortion boxes, Max, and NO TRUE AUDIOP...... Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LousyTourist Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 I figure if your stereo has more than one source component, you are an audiophile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 If I am going to be honest about this Erik you are about the truest audiophile I know - in the real sense - rather than the club card waving - only going the approved way approach. Could it be that a true audiophile leaves no stone unturned in his or her quest for audio nirvana? "I came to a fork in the road and took the path less travelled by. This has made all the difference." (paraphrased) Audio wise - that could be you and it could be me - could be anyone with a Horn loaded system, anyone with a SET amp or anyone with a surround sound amplifier it takes a degree in electrical engineering to work [] Aside from that it looks like I have found a source of drivers for the speaker that shall not speak its name and am waiting for Tony to happen upon a pair fo a decent price on ebay. Wouldn't you just know it though - prices are climbing on the damn things right now. Still - I am sure he will get a pair eventually and we will have a proper play. Finally - I must be a real audiophile - I am in an audiophile DVD that was written up in TAS or Stereophile or something like that over there - apparently. Seemingly they loved it - ergo - signed, sealed and delivered Audiophile over here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 It has been my one true love (earthly possesion) and hobby since I was 11 years old so going on 39 years now I have been addicted to fine musical playback, not sure if this qualifies me for being anything other than a NUT[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted June 11, 2007 Share Posted June 11, 2007 By my interpretation of the definition of the word, I would not consider Erik an audiophile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted June 12, 2007 Author Share Posted June 12, 2007 sniff..... I'm crushed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Potis Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Wow, I'm a little taken aback by the fact that some seem to think that the word audiophile is a dirty one. As far as credentials required, there are none. The most commonly shared trait is that of being male, though I've known of exceptions. Beyond that, all that is required of being an audiophile is being a music lover who also enjoys the gear required for its reproduction. As far as being a male thing; most males love toys. It's the way we are. When you combine the love of toys with the love of music, you can't avoid creating an audiophile. After that, it's unfortunate that audiophiles choose to subdivide into different groups that seem to forget that there are no rules involved in being an audiophile except that he (or she) just enjoys the hobby. JP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommyboy Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I have pages on this stuff!!! There is no real answer to your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.