Are you too old to be an audiophile?


DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be offensive in anyway, just something I've always been curious about and thought it would make for some interesting responses.

One of the things about audiophiles I've always wondered is how they reconcile their age, and the scientific fact that their hearing isn't what it used to be, with their belief they can can hear all the nuances of high end gear, and even the cables. As we age we lose our ability to hear mainly in the higher frequencies. You know that high pitched sound older CRT televisions and some recessed lighting can make? No? Neither do my parents.
Thoughts?
farjamed
The "scientific fact" that my/our hearing isn't what it used to be is actually fairly complex. Some relatively young persons have degraded hearing in consequence of prolonged or frequent exposure to rock concerts, jack hammers, and so on. Genetic differences, pathogens, and a variety of other factors and circumstances may also account for hearing differences. So the aging process -- still imperfectly understood -- is not the only variable (or set of variables)that ought to be considered insofar as "hearing" is concerned. And, as some of the posts suggest, the matter of "enjoyment" is even more complex (and, I think, hopeful).
According to Merriam-Webster's definition: "Audiophile: a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction".

Merriam-Webster says it's all about enthusiasm. That specifically doesn't say anything about actual audio acuity/Golden Ears (nor about a whole lotta other stuff... ;~).

I do kinda wonder - what did you really expect for responses? Do you consider yourself an audiophile? And do you know how much audio acuity you've lost since you were ~17 and how has that affected you as a potential audiophile? You didn't live your formative years w/ earphones jammed in and cranked up, did you?

Since we're here on AudiogoN I'd sure hope you receive many enthusiastic responses. For many/most, this hobby almost by definition ain't about being rational so probably enthusiasm is the next best alternative...
The "nuances of high end gear" do not exist exclusively in frequencies above 14K. Dynamic contrasts exist at all freqs.

You lose some abilities when you age and you gain others.

I would rather have the ability to "get" 100% of the 90% I can hear verses 70% of the 100% I was able.
Not that I hold any more stock in their opinions than I do for any other person with two ears and a heart and soul who happens to love music, but apparently some hold the staff of the audio rags in somewhat elevated esteem. I wonder the age of some of the senior writers and editors there. And what about the manufacturers of some of the most revered gear...why don't you go ask Nelson Pass to "reconcile his age"? I know at least two audiophiles who are deaf in one ear so they do not hear soundstaging cues, one I've known personally for over three decades. Both have made some of the most astute and sensitive assessments of how a playback system sounds that were dead-on to my own feelings about the same (obviously soundstaging was not included). I met a guy at a headphone meet recently who was mostly deaf and listened to headphones at 100++ db levels in order to enjoy the music he loved. Though the differences he heard were not as pertinent to me with my average hearing, who am I to question his profound enjoyment and enthusiasm for the hobby. Who am I to question someone elses enjoyment of music, or what sounds best to them? Sure, discussions can be interesting and may make one reflect differently on what they are hearing, or try something new out and compare. I've quoted a post before that rings true to me, and I'll paraphrase here - ultimately the recreation of a musical event is an illusion that takes place in ones brain via the stimulus provided to the various sensory systems involved and filtered through experience so individual as to never find a match in the entire population of this planet. Who are we to question someone else's experience of that illusion? It's their illusion, going on in their brain...not in ours. How is one illusion better than another and how would you ever possibly know that, to compare the two illusions...and why does it even matter? The enjoyment of music and of the reproduction thereof is entirely subjective. We are not machines spewing out graphs on paper. There are other very good points above, and there are resources online and at your local audiologist if you really want to test your hearing. Last time I checked last year I could not hear past 16khz at age 50. What does that matter really? I have not a clue. How did Beethoven reconcile composing his last symphony when he couldn't even hear the music except in his own mind? Not really the same question, but perhaps illustrates my question to you - what's the point?
Not meaning to divert from main topic here but an observation of mine: I'm sixty-ish and find it interesting when listening to music that anytime I pull the edges/lobes of my ears outward a bit my audible perception of high frequency sound improves. My unscientific explanation for this is that by pulling my ears outward I'm increasing the surface area of my ear that catches the sound waves. Interesting though that no improvement is heard in low frequencies from doing this. Note: this is with my ears well irrigated from wax. Opinions welcome scientific or otherwise.