Buying Equipment Based on Philosophy???

Reputations are earned 

I wouldn't call it philosophy.  Nietzsche is philosophy.  I'd call what you describe "design approach".  

I do indeed choose my equipment based on design approach.  For example, I will not bother to audition a tube amp based on PC boards.  I want a simple signal path...I think passive components can only degrade sound, never add anything.  etc  (don't argue with these, these are just examples and I know there are people who disagree but that would derail the thread)

I think people who are more technical in nature are more likely to form such opinions.

Jerry

I understand the word "philosophy" used in this context to indicate a complex notion, namely, design-used-for-intended-acoustics-complementary-of-music.

In other words, there's a sound the designer has in mind -- a flavor profile, if you will -- and this is chosen based on what the designer thinks the music needs. It is philosophical because it is the application of general ideas regarding musical aesthetics to the best engineering designs to accomplish that -- and to a price point. This, I think, is what is making Schiit so successful.

I like buying recordings based on the engineer.

I certainly fell for the magazine fuelled Linn/Naim bullshit back in the 1980s.

This, despite my reservations of one certain Ivor Tiefenbrun (Linn) he always sounded like a shifty individual.

Julian Vereker (Naim) on the other hand seemed rather more candid and straightforward, as did Roy Gandy (Rega). Julian even once said he'd have a Quad system if he couldn't have one of his own amps.

Eventually I woke up to the realisation there was more to audio playback than mere PRAT (pace, rhythm and timing). In fact, there’s an awful lot more, including tone, texture, imagery etc.

The problem with most of these ’philosophies’ is that they tend to only promote their own strengths and remain very quiet about the weaknesses.

So therefore perhaps they shouldn’t really be called philosophies, perhaps sales pitch would be a better description?