Has audiophilia changed your music taste?

I think it is too simplistic to break it down into a
convenient, but artificial split between those who listen
to music and those who listen to their systems. This
sounds to me like typical one-ups-man-ship rather than
an attempt to understand why some posters' musical tastes
have changed. There's a world of difference between
Audiophile tripe that is the musical equivilent of those
recordings of trains and such that some of our fathers
bought to hear the effects of stereo, and Mahler, Coltrane,
Max Roach, Clifford Brown, early Ray Charles, Robert
Johnson, Muddy Waters, Charlie Parker, Art Tatum, Aretha
Franklin, Early Staple Singers, Charlie Patton, and the
list goes on and on and on....

That ain't music, but the stuff you listened to when you
were 17 is? Well..........okay. I can accept that this may be one's "reality." But, I would advise -- don't kid yourself into believing this is true for everyone. To do so would indicate that not only haven't one's musical tastes changed, but neither has one's youthful solipsistic world view.

Rsbeck: I'm not saying that one type of music or system is better than any other. Nor am i saying that people's tastes and attitudes don't change with time. What i am saying is that a good system should allow you to listen to whatever you want, whenever you want. You should also be able to enjoy those recordings AND listen as deeply into them as you would like.

Obviously, we all place different values on music reproduction. Some may prefer very specific imaging, some may prefer impact / dynamic range, others may value harmonic and timbral accuracy, etc... I think that as one builds a system that highlights one of those specific areas, the natural inclination is to select discs that allow that virtue to shine through, possibly at the expense of other areas of performance / enjoyability. As such, it is a fine line / balancing act that is required to obtain a well rounded system that works well with a variety of recordings and types of music. Limiting yourself to only top notch recordings and / or a very select range of music that highlights specific aspects of system performance would be pretty boring in my opinion. Variety ( especially in music ) is one of the great joys in life. Why limit yourself through the use of a limiting system or musical selections ? Sean
>

I've been an audio salesman--I know what "audiophiles" listen to.

Sean, you forgot to mention *intimacy*. Nearfield is the ticket to intimacy...

Who is Patricia Barber anyway?
Dan Wright said he tested my modded Swans with Patricia Barber--I sent him a copy of a heavy duty salsa CD. I was worried he would be using some audiophile music, so I took the initiative.

As for musical taste, no, my musical taste has nothing to do with my gear. What my gear delivers me is *intimacy*.

Rsbeck - Are you suggesting that audiophiles listen to Clifford Brown because of the quality of the recording? Perhaps I'm missing something, but I'm not suggesting that any of the great performers whom you listed are equivalent to the "audiophile tripe".

I'm not sure that I have told you (nor did anyone else) what I was listening to when I was seventeen. A short list goes something like this: Billy Cobham, John McLaughlin (Mahavishnu Orchestra), Buddy Rich, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Maynard Ferguson, Rush, Metallica, Talking Heads, Stravinsky, Wynton Marsalis, Hindemith, Shostakovich, Mussorgsky, Empire Brass, Take 6 to name a few.

No one-ups-man-ship intended. But I would submit that a trained ear can appreciate music on a completely different level than can the untrained ear. In the real-world we call such people experts. In stereodom, I guess we call them snobs. Listen, I admire fine automobiles and have even owned a few but I would not consider myself on par with an automotive engineer or a master mechanic. Granted, we may love said vehicle equally well, but simply cannot appreciate it in on the same level. This goes both ways. Likewise, a musician (unless formally trained in electrical engineering) cannot appreciate a stereo component in the same fashion as an engineer. He/she may appreciate the sound that it produces, but has no idea of the elegant design that makes the piece so special. I'll admit it. I'm a technical know-nothing. That's why I appreciate all of the insight that folks like Sean, Twl, Bear, and many others provide here. I don't think they're snobs because they know more about something than I do. I value their expertise. We all have something to contribute.

Gregm - A poor performance is a poor performance. Crap is crap. I would contend to the contrary; it is easier to listen to a poorly recorded poor performance than a well recorded poor performance which only hightlights the ridiculous music/performance/performer(s).

-Dan

I like Patricia Barber because:

1) She is a good poet and lyricist.

2) She's a good jazz pianist and her voice doesn't sound pretentious or "put-on."

3) Her songs remind me of Greenwich Village scene in the late 1950's and early 60's. Small intimate smoke-filled clubs with 'Beat Poets' and 'Jazz' musicians, and everyone sitting around snapping our fingers to the beat.

4) Her music is very creative in relation to some of today's top monotonous "cool" jazz musicians.

5) She allows each musician in the band to take the spotlight.

6) She cares about the quality of her recordings.

7) And she didn't make it by her looks!