Why audiophiles are different (explained with color)

In the context of one developing a palette for wine or bourbon, is audiophilism largely about the development of a distortion palette relative to the actual arrangement and tonal quality of the instrumental and vocal sounds?   

In the context of one developing a palette for wine or bourbon, is audiophilism largely about the development of a distortion palette relative to the actual arrangement and tonal quality of the instrumental and vocal sounds?

Close but re arrange the whole thing.

That the individual ear distorts... and we learn how to hear though our own individual distortion pattern. Our individual pattern and signal recognition and recording sytem. So to speak.

Where measurements are simply an agreed upon standard that we can hopefully use to have a functional baseline in comparisons. where enough of the parameters in measurement can erupt into a useful, transferable, repeatable testing system.

We can’t quite call it distortions as we don’t (generally, in the public or even the pro/science level) know the true relation of the hearing system -- to the so called measured numbers.

Some might be closer to that equation being solved than others... but until then, it will remain as a situation where the ’relative truth’ will stand in similar value to all the wrong directions or incorrect ones.

Thus all the colors of the audio language have evolved in a real and normal manner as to tasting or color definition in it’’s most minute detectibility, - Which is the limits of capacity for recognition and expression of nuance. Where everyone is different in that given skill set.

And that detectibility and/or language, in the general, continues to grow and evolve... and as that happens, as a system in flow or change.. we can begin to narrow in on a more agreed upon common path.

I think I'm suggesting there is a distortion pallete that we develop that is subliminal in the sense that we can't point to it yet we are in touch with it because it triggers pleasure, which causes us to be dialed in and constantly seeking that pleasurable sensation (underlying sonic signature/ distortion palette).  

If that makes sense, think about the use of sound in music therapy in terms of neurological, psychological, and/or physical affect.

Perhaps it is when we are able to consistently achieve such distortion palette  (underlying sonic signature) via our audio system, we get back to enjoying the music...which (underlying sonic signature), ultimately, may not have much to do with technical specs or the so called high end level of one's equipment. However, it still makes sense that better equipment plus a consistent underlying sonic signature fosters the best experience (I guess that our perception of the quality of audio equipment is based substantially upon our perception of how individual and arranged sounds should sound relative to our musical experience).

In other words, audiophiles are different, in part, because of being obsessed with a particular underlying sonic signature.

On the other hand, the so called purists of audiophilism are obsessed with inner detail, and a certain exactness to the reproduction of music (whether it be timbre, soundstage, slam, etc).

Without being in the head of the writers, musicians, and sound engineers, and the venues that we experience music in, aren't our equipment preferences shaped by our musical diversity or lack thereof (neither less or more diversity is necessarily better or worse: i.e. - one could have a diversity of bad musical experiences or have a few really great experiences that shape the development of a sonic preference, etc.).

It may be that audiophilism is better served because there is so much that is understood, misunderstood, and unknown.
 
Having said, a more insightful common path to finding what is most pleasurable (based upon individual taste) is a worthy goal.