Audiophile Rant

The BBQ Pit
1

Ok, This is a stupid rant, that I’m sure will fall of the pages in no time, but I’ve had just about enough of this crapola. Too often on these boards, audiophiles are treated like retarted children. As if anyone who takes the reproduction of audio seriously is a fool that can’t tell reality from fantasy.

Before the crowd comes in and points out all of the silly stuff that is sold under the name of high end audio, let me admit that there is a great deal of snake oil out there. Products that are overpriced garbage, that do nothing, or are untested/unproven. There is also a great deal of snake oil in the diet / health industry, but does that mean that people who try to eat right and be healthy are boobs?

In this thread a random audiophile is being ridiculed for buying an amplifier that uses vacuum tubes. This ridicule is either about how he obviously doesn’t know tubes cause harmonic distortion, or that he isn’t following their definition of what ‘audiophiles’ are supposed to do.

Let me give you guys a hint, the well-read audiophile knows DAMN well that tubes produce higher distortion than transistors. They also know that the distortion is different, and is pleasing to the ear. You see, they know that there is more distortion, but it isn’t irritating like transistor distortion.

I am not, personally, an audiophile, though I have been close friends with people who are, and have participated in their quest for the perfect system. I have heard systems that throw sound in ways that your audio engineer’s ‘adequate’ $1000 system could never do. Of course that probably makes me an ‘insufferable bore’, so my opinion and experience is irrelevant.

If you haven’t sat in front of a high end audio system, listening for what these audiophiles listen for, don’t pretend that you actually know a fucking thing about them, because you don’t. There is far more to sound reproduction than frequency response and decibel levels. Properly reproduced sound has a feel that is delicate and not easy to get. Speaker positioning, listener positioning, room dimensions, speaker dimensions, the list goes on and on and on, so many things affect the final product, it is astounding.

Feel free to ridicule me about this, but at least I know that I have actually experienced it, and aren’t just flapping my gums.

2

The quest for perfect sound can indeed be fun, especially when it isn’t your wallet that’s questing. J

The types of things most audiophiles throw money at, however, is just ridiculous. If your audiophile friends spent most of their time and money on speakers and placement, then they were likely not wasting much time and effort. The audiophiles I know, however, usually end up with speakers that cost a grand or two, and 15-20 grand of electronics to power them. (not to mention a few thousand in cables) To me, this is the exact opposite of where the money should be spent.

As far as tube amps go, I personally, can hear minimal difference. I have seen double blind tests where golden ears couldn’t even hear the difference between tube and solid state amps.

Also, don’t assume that just because you can make $20,000 sound wonderful that you can’t do amazing things with a grand. I personally have a $1050 system that has completely embarrassed my roommates $25k setup on more than one occasion. It is not simply an adequate system, but for my room size and musical tastes, damn near as good as it gets. I have swapped out $5k speakers and been disappointed. Had $10k in amps (monoblock tubes as well) hooked up with no real change. Even put in a $3k source and really could not hear a difference. The only differences I have heard have been negative ones, if they are there at all. (a couple cd players and amps just sounded bad, for various reasons)

In case you’re wondering, the setup is this. Magnepan MMG’s, Sony SACD, NAD T761, Radio Shack and Home Depot cables. 11x15 foot listening room.

Had I gone the traditional upgrade route, I probably would have spent close to 20 grand and a whole lot of time before I ever had a significant improvement in sound. I was lucky enough to be able to try all these different components (roommate is also a speaker rep) and see for myself if they had any effect before I was financially involved and HAD to hear an improvement.

Also, there is a name for a well read audiophile, but I can’t repeat it here. :wink:

3

Well, I both agree and disagree with you Cheesesteak. I agree in the sense that it is ridiculous to criticize someone for preferring tube gear ( if it is more pleasing to the ear, who gives a crap if it is harmonially distorted? ) or expensive gear in general. People like what they like and its a fact that more expensive equipment often ( not always ) IS better. Moreover even less-expensive gear from dedicated audiophile manufacturers is often better than equivalent mass-market gear at the same price ( a $200 pair of little Paradigm Atom speakers will generally blow away any comparable or even much more expensive mass-market brand speakers at your local Best Buy ).

So it’s not a stupid hobby, by any means.

That said, the general view of audiophiles as fussy, obsessive perfectionists that are more interested in equipment than music is sometimes all to accurate. Like all hobbyists, a certain segment are prone to going overboard, which really does set them up for a certain amount of ridicule. Legitimate ridicule, at that.

  • Tamerlane
4

Well, I know that audiophiles are always claiming to strive for a “transparent” system, meaning one that adds no distortion or frequency non-flatness (is that a word?), even deviation from linear phase. Then you come along in the other thread and you say, contrary to everything I’ve read from the advertisements, magazines, everywhere else, that audiophiles know and like certain kinds of distortions.

Now it might be true that they like it, but it definitely goes against the ideals they claim to hold.

Hey, Mort Furd, you mentioned in the other thread that Bob Pease offered various audiophiles to put their ears to the test. I hadn’t heard Bob’s name in years - I used to read his column every month, probably 10 or 12 years ago. He’s quite the expert in analog design, especially in low-noise op-amps. But I had the impression back then that he was a crotchety old fart who would probably retire or die soon - is he still around?

5

Well, that’s the thing - A jump up from a Sanyo boombox to a cheap mass market stereo will get you 80% of the way home. A jump from there to your system will get you to 95%. A further 10-25k might get you to 97% :D. After a certain point, diminishing returns settle in for most.

On the other hand if you have the cash ( including to acoustically modify or build a special room to house and complement the gear ) and that’s how you want to spend it, more power to you. Bet it’ll sound swell. But for most it is way more than you’ll ever need to be content. Of course, that’s the thing - Some ( a minority, I’m sure ) of audiophiles are incapable of being content.

Though there are some who just like to fiddle with different equipment and change stuff around frequently - That’s certainly legitimate too, if you can afford it.

  • Tamerlane
6

Some audiophiles do ( we can call them “the purists” :wink: ), but others prefer a compromise of transparency/accuracy and “sweet-sounding” gear - some combination that they find pleasing to the ear. They still call themselves audiophiles, because they are into high-end equipment and strive for the best sound by their own individual standards.

  • Tamerlane
7

Ok, I’ll admit that a well spent 20 grand might bump me from 95% to 97%, however, the way audiophiles talk, you would think they are going from 13% to 150% just by changing cables.

Also IMHO, I think the cheap mass market stereo might get you to 55% or 60%, but that’s about it.

8

One thing to keep in mind, there are plenty of audiophiles who sneer at the tube guys, too. Tube vs. Solid State is a real contention point with lots of them. It’s the same old arguments too, is transparency better than pleasant harmonic distortion?

tastycorn, that sounds like a pretty darn good system to me! My roommate had a set of Magnepans for a while, as did my brother, great sound, but a bit large for the room.

Of course, my roomate had a cheap sort-of high end system, (Linn Tucans and an Adcom integrated, I think)which sounded great, but he wasn’t satisfied either. 6 years later, he’s almost there. :smiley:

9

Cheesesteak,

Check out the MMG’s. Magnepan is putting them out as kind of a teaser for their larger models. Only 4 feet tall but you get 97% of the sound of the big boys in a smaller room. At $550 a pair, no tax or shipping, I almost bought a pair for the bathroom as well. :slight_smile:

http://www.magnepan.com/

Ok, end of commercial, back to CNN…

10

Cheesesteak, I suspect that it’s myself who you might be referring to in this thread as being the “culprit ridiculer” in the other thread you linked to.

May I point out, in my defence, that my intentions were never, at any stage, to belittle or ridicule anyone in the other thread. Merely, my goal was to offer further insight to the various aspects of what makes good hi-fi good hi-fi.

The physics involved in valve tubes is indeed a fascinating one. I’d like to think that by offering insight into those physics that one can do so without actually taking a cheap shot at someone.

I asserted in the other thread that I bet your friend isn’t aware of the “musically acceptable harmonic distortion” which inherently exists in ALL valve tubes - and to demonstrate my point, I explained how it works in a dedicated guitar amp when you really, REALLY overdive the valves.

I never intended any offence… honestly.

In short, the rule of thumb is this… so long as your input amplitude isn’t coming within 5% of optimal maximum input, the amount of harmonic distortion in a tube amp is extremely minimal. In this context, if your friend is using a power amp with oodles and oodles of redundant valve headroom (like say 8 x 30 watt power valves), or better yet, two or three power amps which are passively split in their source signal, then it’s safe to say that musical harmonic distortion won’t be manifesting itself under MOST circumstances.

But driven hard, by definition, all valves are inherently capable of the harmonic distortion I referred to.

Oddly enough though, in many respects, valve distortion is highly sought after thing. In particular, in the field of famous valve preamplified German dual diaphragm microphones from the 1940’s, 50’s and 60’s. To this day, these microphones remain the most famous, most sought after mic’s in recording studios areound the world. And the reason is because they offer an inherent “compression” on transient peaks which is quite soothing to the ear.

Sinatra was famous for saying “I don’t sing anywhere without my ‘Tele’” and he was referring to his Telefunken badged Neumann U-47. If you visit various websites of famous recording studios around the world, you’ll find those studios offer Neumann U-47’s and U-67’s as their most valuable pride of place items for hire. And this is valve technology going all the way back to the valves used in German field radios in World War Two believ it or not!

The issue with valves is headroom. The more power valves you have in your power amp circuitry, the more headroom you have, and the less chance of harmonically musical distortion.

My point in the other thread is that many, MANY people aren’t aware of how it all comes together in the final mix.

11

It is funny though, Boo Foo Foo, that the distortion on tube amps can be what makes it sound good, BUT an audiophiles quest for power reduce the chance they will ever hear that distortion.

Could be why so many people rave about those tiny 8-12 watt tube amps.

12

The problem with audiophiles from my prospective is that reproduction of sound is very much a science in this day and age but many audiophiles talk about it vague terms like warmth etc. Many also promote junk like oxygen free copper cables and wire that conducts better one way verses the other way.

Audiophiles are sort of like people who believe in psychic abilities they have a huge resistance to well setup double blind tests of what they believe in.

13

Boo Boo Foo, your post did kick off the discussion that got my goat, though the responses I got back were at least as important. I’m glad that you didn’t mean to offend, and your right that many audiophiles aren’t super technical about the equipment. However, they very well know that tubes do distort the signal, they just look for ones that distort it the ‘best way’, adding pleasant stuff, and not taking too much away.

Well, gazpacho, I think there could be an argument there about art vs. science. For instance, playing a piano is nothing more than striking keys and pedals with a certain force and timing. To say it’s a science and that there is only one ‘right’ way to play a piece is silly. There can be many interpretations of a piece, each different and ‘right’. It’s the same with audio.

One guy might want that warm and comforting sound, so he gets a small tube amplifier, a turntable and speakers that accentuate that sort of sound. Another guy might want a powerhouse system that knocks your socks off, he’s got a huge pair of solid state monoblock amps, DVD-A (or SACD) player, and some humungous speakers. Another guy might like to hear a big soundstage and precise imaging, he’ll choose a different set of speakers altogether, with equipment that works with that.

There IS junk out there, but I think there is also a very interesting hobby there too, if you’re smart about it.

14

He’s still around, an even older crotchety old fart. A great guy, and my best reason for visiting the Electronic Design homepage.

He touches on other things in his columns sometimes these days, but he still kicks out a lot of info and insight into analog design.

15

Which, by what I’ve always understood about audiophiles, makes these two guys into not audiophiles. Not that my opinion matters.

There are so many small things that are important but that don’t get referenced in the audio magazines I’ve seen, that I have a hard time taking them seriously.

One thing that always comes to mind here is the impedance match between the output of, say, a preamp and the input stage of a power amp. If they aren’t matched correctly, then you run a good chance of either screwing up the frequency response or of causing distortion. What do the magazines talk about? Which expensive cable should be used to connect the two components - not whether or not those two components will work well together.

Similarly, they concentrate on the digital reading of the data from the CD instead of whether or not the next component is properly matched to the analog output stage of the digital to analog converter. Of the two, the matching on the output is much more likely to cause distortion or other problems - but the audiophiles concentrate on the digital side (which is usually very resistant to problems) instead.

I’ll happily listen to a knowledgeable person tell me about how an echo in his listening room drives him batty, or about how the poor frequency response in a certain range of frequencies of his speakers lessens his enjoyment of his favorite piece of music.

Someone who tells me he can hear a difference between to pieces of wire (provided both are of adequate size for the load and properly connected) is going to get at best a disbelieveing stare, and at worst I’m gonna laugh my ass off.

Anybody want to buy a jitter eliminator for their digital output from the CD player? It makes the music sound so much clearer and more open and free. I’ve got just a few left, and I’ll make you a good price. Snork

16

You’re defining an audiophile by what the magazines write? All the audio guys I know have the same complaints that you do. Hmmm…

17

Playing the piano is quite different from accurately reproducing a specific performance. When we buy stereo equipment we are concerned with accurately reproducing a what has been recorded. When we choose one CD over another CD we are choosing the art. There is a huge difference and that you don’t seem to see it says quite a lot about audiophiles.

18

Playing devil’s advocate, one might say that playing the piano is just accurately reproducing the notes written by the composer. You and I both know that is nonsense, but it illustrates the way people think about audio reproduction. There is no ‘accurate’ way to reproduce an audio mix, there is no perfect system that does it all just right. The art, if you will, is in playing off the various tradeoffs, using the varied qualities of the available equipment to get the most enjoyable sound you can.

Mort Furd, you’re coming dangerously close to a “True Scotsman” argument there.

19

I’m telling you the truth - at least in reference to the wire.

Cables and wires are not magic, art, or witchcraft. They are well understood and characterised - by the engineers who make the stuff in the first place and by anyone with a technical leaning who can read specifications. If you want to convince me that one piece of cable is better than another, then you’d better come prepared to talk numbers and be able to precisely describe what you are hearing - and be prepared for a double blind test.

20

Two things:
-yes, tube amp sound good! Although BOSE has gotten MOSFET amps to sound just as good!
-I DON’T believe the crap about “low oxygen” copper speaker wires…for what they chatge for these, you could have solid silver wires!
Finally, itis well known that the upper frequecy that you can hear declines with age…and, your uppercutoff frquency also declines due to listening at the threshold of pain! How many rock fans have damaged their hearing by listening to pumped-up heavy metal?