An Audiophile is Anyone Who Loves Audio Regardless of Monetary Status. Agree?

@brettmcee, I think you’re absolutely right, I think it is all about sound reproduction. Your example of the plane taking off is the perfect illustration. As an old DJ, trained as a sound engineer who worked for most of his life in the audio/video Industry, (and not at selling TV’s for Best Buy), I can say I have a pretty extensive knowledge of what audio is and my take on that is that being a real audiophile depends on many factors that are not only based on wealth. If I could compare quickly to another "hobby", I would say visual Art. Nothing is more subjective than what you can see and how you interpret it. What is your knowledge in the matter, what you can refer to, what you can afford to bring back home, who you will talk about it ... is Art a question of money? yes and no, just like audio gear. Part is fact, part is pure imagination. To judge it, what do you know about writing music? Playing it yourself? Can you differentiate cellos types, identify a saxophone? Would you know what type of mic to use to record an instrument? How to amplify it? How would you be sure that the reproduction is correct? Were you there in the studio? What system was giving the original sound? What single track equalization gave the engineer during the mix? what about the colour, timbre and realism he gave to it? Money don’t buy knowledge, and without knowledge, you can just guess, loaded or not. And at the end, or maybe at the beginning, there are your ears... have you measured seriously what and how they perform? How do they work today? I know mine are not what they used to be anymore, I am conscious of it and this definitely put a limit to what I would spend in any system. Just my opinion... :)

Yeah Tim (@noble100), and the term suggests sound quality comes before musical quality (in recordings). I prefer to think of us all as music lovers who want its' reproduction in our homes to sound "right".

Brett & vinny,

I think that we you are alluding to is the fact that there is an acceptable level of "indulgence" when buying luxury items and that exceeding this level (set by you apparently) is reckless and morally irresponsible. 

brettmcee,

Not everybody who owns a nice car or expensive (whatever you deem expensive) sound system is a gullible dummy. Not at all.

I spent ten years building rigs in the $5K-ish range and learned firsthand when I became a reviewer that the gear matters, and the price of the gear is correlated to performance.

No amount of griping, pleading, b*tching, yelling, ridiculing, etc. changes that. If I may use a motorcycle analogy, as I ride. I just recently bought a 2016 Yamaha FJ-09, a sport touring design. Should someone make the argument that a vintage Royal Enfield bike perform as well, I would consider them a fool. Likewise, suggesting that 30 year old components perform at a level of current technology is, imo, an ignorant statement. I have used enough vintage gear to know that it doesn’t compete well with current products. IF price is the determinant, then obviously using a sliding scale one can argue that the older stuff is "as good" or "better", but this is a determination made by value relative to performance, not an absolute judgement based on performance only. Things can get messy when value is inserted into the judgment of sound quality.

I was an audiophile when I was using a boom box in the garage lifting weights as a 16 year old. Been one ever since I had my first all in one stereo at about age 12. Was I an accomplished audiophile? No. I was a novice. I would consider myself very passionate about sound/audio as a novice until I was about 30 and began to explore better sound through better gear.

Perhaps the distinction novice audiophile versus accomplished audiophile might be helpful in the community (versus potentially perjorative phrases such as "good golfer" vs. "bad golfer"). Can the guy with a $500 setup be an audiophile; of course. He may love the gear and the sound, and long for better experience...

Does that make him an accomplished audiophile with years of experience, making multiple systems, advancing his art? No. Does he have to? No. But let’s not play the game that this man is supposed to be considered on a par with the one who spends decades elevating his game. That would be foolish, envious, delusional, etc.

If Vinny55 has spent much money and time developing his system, has been through a lot of current gear and fallen in love with vintage - great, you are a vintage-loving accomplished audiophile.

However, if Vinny55 had the wallet rule the day, never went past a firm barrier in terms of cost, has put up only a couple rigs, and then excoriates those who have done and spent a lot more - then you are a novice audiophile, and one with a poor attitude - and up to this point in your posts divisive. :(

So, perhaps the descriptors "novice" versus "accomplished" might help here. Imo the class/economic gauge is pretty well useless and imo does not bear relation to either personal spending habits, nor the habits of those with high net worth. (For all we know Vinny55 may have high net worth and thinks that in an absolute sense to spend more on equipment is stupid, as though the performance cannot exceed significantly what he has attained. It doesn’t give the right to mock others, but that doesn’t stop some people who feel assured of themselves.)

With my distinction of novice versus accomplished, a person could at any price point or methodology such as DIY, vintage, etc. be placed on the spectrum of "Audiophile", but reveal the involvement without the rankling of judgment based on socio-economic status.