Audiophiles on Audiogon.


During my time here, I have found some of you to be too opinionated - like your life depends upon what you think about audio gear. Holding on to one’s beliefs a bit too tightly is bad for the soul.

I was reading some content on the Ken Rockwell website, and then found an article entitled: "What is an audiophile?"

in the article, Ken says: Audiophiles are non-technical, non-musical kooks who imagine the darnedestly stupid things about audio equipment. Audiophiles are fun to watch; they’re just as confused at how audio equipment or music really works as primitive men like cargo cults are about airplanes.

 

Given my time on this forum and a few others, I have found his statements to be true. I mean, if you have an amplifier that costs say, $10,000, and you buy cables for $20,000, is that really going to improve the sound? (make the stereo image more accurate)

Or on the otherside, if you buy an amplifier for $1000 and then go buy the top of the line audioquest cables costing tens of thousands of dollars, then would the sound improve accordingly? After reading some of their literature, I cannot be sure they have an understanding of how electricrity works, much less the intricate details involving high-end audio systems.

And then we have power conditioning to consider. I have done extensive research online and it turns out that if your gear is really "high-end" it should already have a device inside that filters the incoming AC. Therefore, do you really need a power conditioner?

I learned about PS Audio products being spec-ed much higher than their measured performance. This is also true of the audio "power plants" that cost thousands of dollars. No really, tons of money to "regenerate" power with little to no sonic benefits.

Would love to hear what you guys think about these findings.

 

Oh, and high-end DACs?

This thing will outperform all your fancy gear.

jackhifiguy

Ken Rockwell started out in photography and branched out into just about everything. How he became so knowledgeable about Stereo is beyond me.

When I first found him, he put up some good info, but devolved into posting obvious troll posts that were meant to spark outrage. 

 

The definition you cite claims that audiophiles (implying all, as this is a definition) are:

  • non-technical
  • non-musical
  • confused
  • kooks
  • who imagine the darnedestly stupid things about audio equipment

Then you say that "I have found his statements to be true."

Then you post this on a forum thread.

Is that really what you want to say to actual people -- you know, people with thoughts, feelings, etc.?

What kind of person does that?

Why don’t you pick a fight with someone in person, so you have to face real consequences and can’t hide behind a keyboard?

I cannot add anything to this good analysis...

Dividing people with general non sensical claim associated to ALL of them is beyond stupid...

But i think you are not stupid only ignorant enough to put all people under the same label and describe them this way :

they’re just as confused at how audio equipment or music really works as primitive men like cargo cults are about airplanes.

 

You have yourself for sure peirced the veil.... 😁😊

Audio science review is for the measurement crowd. I am in the camp of what I can hear. As far as tweaks, I will consider things with an open mind and if I hear a sonic change I like  I might buy that gear. I would hazard a guess that plenty of hi-fi equipment purchasers use reviews not their ears to make their choice. I use reviews as a tool to find things that might interest me. I would never buy a piece of gear based solely on some audio reviews. I must hear that gear first.