Musical taste is very personal. There is no hierarchy of "right"- you'll see people deeply into classical that can argue endlessly over the best recorded performance of something that is a staple of classical repertoire. Subjective.
Ditto, pop/rock. I can go from Alice Cooper's Love it to Death (which I regarded as a juvenile "shock rock" act when it was released but is a killer guitar band album) to completely obscure garage band/lo-fi psycho-billy. One of the records I used to use as a "demo" (got out of that habit mostly) was a Crystal Gayle comp with "Brown Eyes Blue." Radio schlock maybe, but great fun.
I thought the jazz peeps were snobs b/c I didn't really know much. The more I dug in, the more I realized it's just a process of exploration. Some of it is pretty out there and with time, my ears became more attuned to what I would have considered cacophony.
I'd say the biggest "mistake" audiophiles make (and I certainly fell into this trap) was to focus on sonics as a determining criterion. Yes, I'd much rather have a good sounding record than a bad sounding one, sonically, but sometimes you don't have much choice.
Beyond that, there is so much music out there, old and new, that nobody knows everything. Who is the judge? You.
