Audiophiles, Music, and Equipment: Can We Be Both "Conservative" AND "Progressive"?


The terms “conservative” and “progressive” can be highly differentiating, polarizing, and clearly segmenting among those who identify as one, or the other. As audiophiles, can we sit back for a moment, take a look inward and ask ourselves the question: “Can we be a little bit of both?”

We’ll start with the premise that the “audiophile” is a music lover, high fidelity equipment connoisseur and generally good person. Great works have been around for centuries. We’ve seen various arrangements, variations, covers, remastering, artistic interpretations, etc. of the original work. We may enjoy the updated versions of the work with instrumentation or technology that was not available at the time. A recent topic on this forum mentioned that an enduring classical piece written for solo piano is most recognized as a full orchestral rendition -- Pictures at an Exhibition. Sometimes the “cover” is more commercially successful than the original writer/songwriter version and, in many cases, a vast improvement of the work. As much as we may welcome, or even prefer, the newer form(s) of the work, something anchors our hearts and souls to the original. We believe that it should be around forever. “Conserving” the piece as the artist intended not only supports and archives accurate music history but allows us to enjoy and fully acknowledge of the genius of who created it. The concepts of “Leave the original intact”, we might say (conserve) and “Allow others to apply their unique talents to create something special” (progressive) may actually coexist in the music world.

The equipment we’ve fondly tinkered with for decades may follow a similar trajectory. We all remember the pieces that just blew us away and began a life-long journey in pursuit of better sound. Numerous principles guiding "better sound" from the past are still relevant today, continually assessed by engineers and audiophiles worldwide. We also remember those moments when “the newest thing” failed to meet expectations. And those times when our patience paid off and those breakthrough technologies finally matured and earned a distinguished place in our audio racks – possibility pushing aside tenured and reliable pieces. “It’s time to move on” appears quite frequently on this forum and rings true for many participants. Others want to “hang on to what they got” for a variety of reasons: financial, emotional, physical, logistics, etc. Or, in their view, the gear may still be performing at its peak and can sonically compete quite well on the open market today. So, there is no strong motivation to change. Yet, there’s this desire to be “progressive”-- not marooned in an audio sense, left by themselves on an island of obsolete ideas and outdated equipment. This dichotomy reveals a synergy among active audiophiles—a desire to maintain what is familiar, competent, and operational while embracing the urge for progress. More often than not, we’ll see a hybrid of both “old school” and “cutting edge” in the same system – perhaps even inside the same chassis.

The conventional tug-of-war between conservative and progressive ideologies might not entirely encapsulate the audiophile community as it relates to music and the equipment designed to reproduce it. We are grown up enough to acknowledge both, and there is more than one “right” answer to a problem.

 

 

128x128waytoomuchstuff

@deep_333

Small world. I was raised in KC, got my degree at CMSU, current home (since 1974) Cape Giraradeau, with strong family ties to the St. Louis area.

Very good observations. Thanks for sharing.

"i tend to be a moderate"

If we’re disclosing here, I consider myself a "Snall Progressive" (something I made up). I believe in improving the human condition by way of carefully calculated, incremental steps that will be truly beneficial, durable and stand up to the test of time. When a new initiative is considered, I have one question, and one rule: "What does it look like when it is finished?" And (if the first is not disclosed/determined), Apply the "100 year rule " What will it look like in 100 years? Current technology, legislation, etc that are working for the majority of the people yet have "flaws" are transitioned out at a pace that makes sense. Oftentimes true motives are not disclosed with new agendas, and why we hang on to old ones, which confuses and corrupts the entire process. Good ideas fail. Bad ideas go to the head of the class.

As you can see from my prior posts, I have a great deal of attention (and emotional inventory) on the subject of division. I’ve written a number of items related to this including my Top 5 WMDs (Weapons of Mass Division). We may be circiling a black hole and have gone past the Event Horizon where nothing can escape -- including TRUTH. I have a theory on the "why" of rigid partisanship. I refer to it as the "P-Myth" -- the myth of policial partisanship. People don’t become "rigid" for the reason(s) they think they do. And, yes, one’s political leanings do shape how they view the world in other areas.

Rewinding back to the topic. The terms "conservative" (and, varations thereof) and "progressive" (and it’s variations) are commonly used today, yet have become toxic and polarizing. As pointed out those components are sometimes "inconsistent" with one’s "leaning". I switched my Rivian R1T, full electric truck (about as "progressive" as you can get in personal transportation) to the "Conserve" driving mode over the weekend. So, wow. both "conservative" and "progressive" attributes living peacefully together in the same space at the same time!  They are very brave people.

Back in the 60’s we had "ideologies". We were still who we were, we just felt strongly about certain things. Today, it’s "progressed" to an identity. The position IS who wee are. And, of couse, the other side IS who they are. Attempts to recognize the humanity of each are are dwindling. There are some 1,700 in ONE group with the mission of geting those people in the same room and recognizing this.

So, there are those in this group who recognize great works from the 1400s and want them to be preserved forever, want those vacuum tubes to be a central component/technology in their music system(s) and be the same person who is chomping at the bit to find new music and a better way to reproduce it. Those who can do this can also be open to new ideas in general while keeping things intact that serve them well -- practically and emotionally.  And respect the viewpoint of others.

As one of the ’uniters' said: "Ask a conversative and a progressive what they love the most, and you’ll usually get the same answer."

Thanks for participating in this (short life) topic. I’m just happy it wasn’t taken down right away. Some very good comments, from some really smart people.

 

@waytoomuchstuff 

My hope that this would be interpreted as originating from a good place and possibly find some common ground.

I'd like to clarify that, IMHO, the above is an entirely admirable goal. The number of similar threads that have devolved into flame wars have made me rather cynical re: the potential for such topics to actually be regarded seriously. This thread is an exception, and I have no desire to detract from its consistently thoughtful tone. 

 

@stuartk

Thanks for taking the time to objectively evaluate the context of the topic.

This is a special group of individuals with common interests. Your comments are a validation of that.