4 ms·

> Your generalisation is unfair. Most Audiophiles just want to listen to music the way the artists intended. That is not my experience at all. Audio gear that

by mbell 8y ago

> Your generalisation is unfair. Most Audiophiles just want to listen to music the way the artists intended. That is not my experience at all. Audio gear that is 'flat', in that it outputs as close a representation to the recording as possible is largely shunned in audiophile circles. They mostly want to listen to something that 'sounds good', with all the psychoacoustic baggage that comes with such a statement. As an example if the end goal is accurate reproduction then a tube amp is objectively worse than almost any other amp built in the last 30 years, yet they sell!

seanp2k2 8y ago
>audiophile circles >They mostly want to listen to something that 'sounds good', with all the psychoacoustic baggage that comes with such a statement TL;DR the technology is so good and so cheap now that what you get from a $150 set-up today rivals stuff costing much more from a decade ago. I still recommend spending 90+% of your budget over a few hundred dollars on better actual reproduction equipment, be it speakers or headphones. Not in my audiophile circle (which is mostly head-fi). There are all different price points, and different goals within those. Most reviews I've read in the past decade talk about if the headphones / IEMs are more targeting accuracy or a "fun" sound, but most of the reviews I've ever read on head-fi are very concerned with accuracy and true-to-recording representation. FWIW I'm very much not alone in my interest in things like super low distortion class D, solid-state headphone amps with digital volume control (so you don't introduce a potentiometer / stepped attenuator / LDR into the signal path), ear measuring mics (e.g. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-headphone-jig https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h... ), digital parametric EQs to adjust for not-perfect frequency response, room correction, etc. The technology in modern decent (decent = what most people would call "high-end", but I'm talking few-hundred-dollar Class D for amps and something along the lines of a properly-engineered ESS 9018-based DAC, maybe $100-200, OR a ~$200-300 headphone DAC+AMP combo, think Oppo HA2-SE level) equipment is so good IMO that headphones / speakers / IEMs make a MUCH MUCH bigger difference than jumping to equipment 10x the cost at the DAC or amp level does. $200 headphones are not bad, but $1000 headphones are damn amazing comparatively. I've owned a dozen pairs of IEMs, and while my gaming 'phones are Shure SE215s, they're not in the same league as my Westone ES60s. Even with that said, most people who have never owned any serious music gear would likely be blown away by just how good the SE215s are, coming out of something like a Fiio K1 or a smartphone / laptop / desktop with a decent DAC+AMP. Tube amps are still fun to play with, but maybe aside from some 300B snobs, I don't think many people really believe that they're more accurate than modern solid state. Some people also still like vinyl, and will happily spend $10k+ on a record player. There are also the high-sampling-frequency crowd and the high-bitrate geeks. It's fun to think about, but I personally can't hear a difference between 192kHz/24bit and Spotify "high quality" 44.1/16 with an RME ADI-2 Pro and HD 800S headphones or the ES60s (both balanced, which does sound slightly better to me in both cases). I actually showed up to a headphone meet in Tokyo and pulled out Spotify to demo some flagship IEMs with, and the guy was trying to explain to me how that was like ~eating caviar on a donut.
- mbell 8y ago
  > ear measuring mics (e.g. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h.. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h.... ) That one sounds suspect but the only way to correctly measure headphones is on a binaural head.
- ericd 8y ago
  Just curious, how do you feel about the Schiit Stack?
modzu 8y ago
generalizing what "audiophiles" want is like trying to generalize what the "blacks" want or what "canadians" want. it makes no sense. what sounds 'good' entirely depends on the source and the listener. so immediately you can see there is no right answer. if you want to listen to old elvis records maybe they sound best on old 60s gear. theres supposed to be some noise. all the girls goin crazy listening to it back in the day -- they were listening on the AM radio! the noise was part of it. listening to classical though -- have you ever been? no speaker can reproduce that experience. some come close; they are not noisy speakers. then there is bass, some people love to have lots of it layered thick on top of everything they listen to. some do not. etc, etc, etc
- Tor3 8y ago
  > listening to classical though[] Yeah.. I vastly prefer a real concert. But some people prefer their home audio setup instead. Even my old aunt.. I heard a guy (self-certified audiophile) complaining about the "bass response" when (apparently for the first time) he went to a classical concert. According to him the orchestra's "bass response" (whatever that means) was sub-standard. I prefer the real concert though (although I mostly go to small avenues). I should add that I have a tiny hearing problem in my left ear - normally I'm not bothered about it at all, but that ear is extremely sensitive to harmonics and quickly turns it into distortion if there's anything not quite right (whatever that is. I have no idea. But I noticed at one time that I can listen at much louder levels with certain high-end speakers. Of the type I could never buy.) Real concerts are bliss though. My ear never complains.

by mbell 8y ago

seanp2k2 8y ago

>audiophile circles >They mostly want to listen to something that 'sounds good', with all the psychoacoustic baggage that comes with such a statement TL;DR the technology is so good and so cheap now that what you get from a $150 set-up today rivals stuff costing much more from a decade ago. I still recommend spending 90+% of your budget over a few hundred dollars on better actual reproduction equipment, be it speakers or headphones. Not in my audiophile circle (which is mostly head-fi). There are all different price points, and different goals within those. Most reviews I've read in the past decade talk about if the headphones / IEMs are more targeting accuracy or a "fun" sound, but most of the reviews I've ever read on head-fi are very concerned with accuracy and true-to-recording representation. FWIW I'm very much not alone in my interest in things like super low distortion class D, solid-state headphone amps with digital volume control (so you don't introduce a potentiometer / stepped attenuator / LDR into the signal path), ear measuring mics (e.g. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-headphone-jig https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h... ), digital parametric EQs to adjust for not-perfect frequency response, room correction, etc. The technology in modern decent (decent = what most people would call "high-end", but I'm talking few-hundred-dollar Class D for amps and something along the lines of a properly-engineered ESS 9018-based DAC, maybe $100-200, OR a ~$200-300 headphone DAC+AMP combo, think Oppo HA2-SE level) equipment is so good IMO that headphones / speakers / IEMs make a MUCH MUCH bigger difference than jumping to equipment 10x the cost at the DAC or amp level does. $200 headphones are not bad, but $1000 headphones are damn amazing comparatively. I've owned a dozen pairs of IEMs, and while my gaming 'phones are Shure SE215s, they're not in the same league as my Westone ES60s. Even with that said, most people who have never owned any serious music gear would likely be blown away by just how good the SE215s are, coming out of something like a Fiio K1 or a smartphone / laptop / desktop with a decent DAC+AMP. Tube amps are still fun to play with, but maybe aside from some 300B snobs, I don't think many people really believe that they're more accurate than modern solid state. Some people also still like vinyl, and will happily spend $10k+ on a record player. There are also the high-sampling-frequency crowd and the high-bitrate geeks. It's fun to think about, but I personally can't hear a difference between 192kHz/24bit and Spotify "high quality" 44.1/16 with an RME ADI-2 Pro and HD 800S headphones or the ES60s (both balanced, which does sound slightly better to me in both cases). I actually showed up to a headphone meet in Tokyo and pulled out Spotify to demo some flagship IEMs with, and the guy was trying to explain to me how that was like ~eating caviar on a donut.

mbell 8y ago
> ear measuring mics (e.g. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h.. https://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/ears-h.... ) That one sounds suspect but the only way to correctly measure headphones is on a binaural head.
ericd 8y ago
Just curious, how do you feel about the Schiit Stack?

modzu 8y ago

generalizing what "audiophiles" want is like trying to generalize what the "blacks" want or what "canadians" want. it makes no sense. what sounds 'good' entirely depends on the source and the listener. so immediately you can see there is no right answer. if you want to listen to old elvis records maybe they sound best on old 60s gear. theres supposed to be some noise. all the girls goin crazy listening to it back in the day -- they were listening on the AM radio! the noise was part of it. listening to classical though -- have you ever been? no speaker can reproduce that experience. some come close; they are not noisy speakers. then there is bass, some people love to have lots of it layered thick on top of everything they listen to. some do not. etc, etc, etc

Tor3 8y ago
> listening to classical though[] Yeah.. I vastly prefer a real concert. But some people prefer their home audio setup instead. Even my old aunt.. I heard a guy (self-certified audiophile) complaining about the "bass response" when (apparently for the first time) he went to a classical concert. According to him the orchestra's "bass response" (whatever that means) was sub-standard. I prefer the real concert though (although I mostly go to small avenues). I should add that I have a tiny hearing problem in my left ear - normally I'm not bothered about it at all, but that ear is extremely sensitive to harmonics and quickly turns it into distortion if there's anything not quite right (whatever that is. I have no idea. But I noticed at one time that I can listen at much louder levels with certain high-end speakers. Of the type I could never buy.) Real concerts are bliss though. My ear never complains.