@bretmcee: "@n80 yeah, maybe just don’t use analogies my friend, because using one poorly does the exact opposite of what you are trying to achieve."
Actually, the analogies served their purpose perfectly well. Picking apart an analogy while failing to grasp the primary point is just as bad as a bad analogy.
"All of your analogies require a career in something or specific training. Audiophilia, by globally accepted definition, requires neither being a professional, nor any type of training."
All of my analogies require a certain level of experience. You focused on the wrong common denominator trying to support a point that is unsupportable.
"Also look at the definition of the word aficionado."
Actually, I think you are the one who needs to look it up since it includes elements of knowledge about the subject and a "fervent" pursuit of it. So lack of experience and first hand knowledge of a subject certainly disqualifies one as an aficionado. Listening through ear buds as you sole audio experience does not qualify one as an aficionado not matter how "enthusiastic" one is.
Wishing something is true is far different from the truth.
But in the end, I don't really care how you or vinny want to define audiophile. In your worlds where word meaning has no concrete value then anything goes. But it seems a bit ironic....no, hypocritical would be the better word, that you want to define audiophile any way you want but then have very specific, and hateful, labels for those you define as wealthy.
And you can't argue with someone who has their own definitions for everything.
You live in a magical world. I hope life is good there for you.
