• On The Insider: Sexiest Magazine Covers of All Time
May 2, 2008 6:52 AM PDT

Shattering audiophile stereotypes

Audiophile gear is always really expensive.

Not true. While there's no shortage of stupid expensive audio toys, there's lots of affordable stuff too, such as Rotel's beautifully built RA 1062 integrated amplifier ($699).

(Credit: Rotel)

Audiophiles rarely embrace new technology.

Guilty, with an explanation. Audiophiles don't jump on every new tech gizmo that comes down the pike, so we steered clear of iPods for the longest time. But now that we can get uncompressed digital directly out of the little buggers with devices like Wadia's 170iTransport, audiophiles are getting with the program. We were just waiting for them to sound decent.

All audiophiles are really old.

You got me, there are very few under 40 'philes, and I wish I knew why. That certainly wasn't true when I was in my early 20s. Please don't write and whine that younger people can't afford the good stuff. Good stuff was always expensive, but if you really wanted it, you found a way to buy some. Second hand high-end gear is a good way to get in.

Audiophiles are all anti-digital.

No way. Sure, there's a lot of hard-core vinyl junkies reveling in analog bliss, but at least three or four times as many audiophiles are into digital and steer clear of vinyl. Most stick with CD and some mix CD and SACD/DVD-Audio discs into their collections. Some go both ways, and savor the best of analog and digital.

Audiophiles are weird.

True, but no weirder than guys who obsess about watches, cars, baseball cards, or boats. Audiophiles have a passion for sound and music. Is that such a bad thing?

Originally posted at The Audiophiliac
Steve Guttenberg is a frequent contributor to magazines and Web sites including Home Entertainment, Playback, and Ultimate AV. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Recent posts from Crave
The Cute Lepers, 'Terminal Boredom': Free MP3 of the Day
Verizon officially debuts RIM BlackBerry Storm
CEA: Economy down, TV sales up
HTC Touch HD won't be coming to the U.S.
MP3 Insider 118: MP3 Insiders get silly
Add a Comment (Log in or register) 14 comments
by MadLyb May 2, 2008 7:46 AM PDT
Good post. I know we pick on you for some of the outrageous stuff you post, but we all have passions and this is yours. I would say that paying $700 for a 2 Channel 60 watt amplifier is not what I would consider affordable, though I guess if you are comparing it to $150K turntables or $30K Speakers, it is. 8^P
Reply to this comment
by Pawz2142 May 2, 2008 8:00 AM PDT
Im young (21) ...and weird...and an audiophile w00t! But really i don't mind new techs but i do like the best of the best and look for good sound where ever I can.

My home theater is the Klipsch RF-52s and I love them <3
Reply to this comment
by rrh13 May 2, 2008 9:45 AM PDT
Great post. Before I go any further, a recent survey of surround sound system owners indicated that most of them do not have the rear channels hooked up. Now, I have been an audiphile because I love hearing music in my home that makes me feel like I am at a live performance (within the limitations of my budget). A 60 watt reciever that is well designed is better than any 100-150 watt per channel reciever that most people buy, and usually for less money. In fact, it probably sounds significantly better at louder volumes than the aforementioned high-watt receivers. It should be noted that clean wattage does not sound as loud as "dirty" wattage. That means that you are able to listen at much louder volumes with a receiver with lower distortion than, like this Rotel, than with a receiver that is producing distortion as it tries to produce more power. Additionally, a great internal power supply is what allows truly usable wattage. Just because a receiver is rated at 150w/channel, does not mean that it can reproduce music through speakers at a loud volume (I will refrain from the a discussion of physics). Unfortunately, everyone thinks more is better. To cteate sound levels that are substantially louder than this Rotel would take more than just a few additional watts per channel per the standardized rating techniques. I hope that people try to listen to a truly well engineered piece of equipment as this and hear what they have been missing.
Reply to this comment
by JustinGN May 2, 2008 12:36 PM PDT
As a newly-realized audiophile myself, buying on a budget is one thing I always strive to do, so the second-hand (Or the display models from HT stores) tend to be the products I eye the most. That said, I'm only a recent audiophile, so my current setup is far from audiophile-grade (It's an old Denon receiver and some tiny Sony Satellites, with a Yamaha Powered Sub.). As for the under-40 audiophile crowd, I think that it's largely due to the current music landscape that the audiophile group is shrinking on a year-by-year basis. Heck, it wasn't until my own introduction to some B&W Towers and a Rotel Amp that I truly discovered what I was missing, and even then, I had to go out of my way to find a store with gear to audition.

Until the Best Buy's and Apple's of the world put quality over quantity again, then I think it's a safe bet that the audiophile fanbase is going to progressively shrink. That's a sad thing, because it inevitably means that some smaller outfits may not be able to continue making gear or drop out of business entirely.
Reply to this comment
by DarkHawke May 5, 2008 4:28 AM PDT
Um, dunno 'bout most folks, but 7 bills for an AMP is kind of beaucoup from whence I hail. Hate to see what you'd happily pay for a receiver, let alone speakers. If it's what you love, hey, go with God, but unless you're pullin' down an s-load more than yours truly (entirely possible!), that's still in the pricy range.

BTW, of the five stereotypes you cite, you admit to three of them, and I submit you're in denial about #1. Not exactly a good batting average to shattering stereotypes.
Reply to this comment
by jaspoon187 May 5, 2008 8:41 AM PDT
Been an audiophile since I was 16. Currently 27 (and yes I have had an iPod for a very long time so right off the bat I've disproved 2 of your assertions, wait though I'm just getting warmed up!). I have been doing this long enough to know better than to believe what you say that not all audio gear is "stupid expensive". Your own post disproves this completely. Giving, as an example, a $700 integrated amp only proves this. Most people would take that $700 and buy a full surround sound setup complete with DVD/Blu-ray and still have money left over for plenty of music and movies.

Back on earth $700 is a lot of money, and what do you get for that? An integrated amp. What do you still need? Speakers, cdp, wiring, turntable etc etc. At the end of the day lets pretend you spend $700 for your integrated, multiply that 4 and you've got yourself a very bare bones $2800 system (and no material to play on said system)

In the end yes, you probably have a decent low-fi/mid-fi system, but the reality is, in the audiophile world, this is merely the beginining of an ongoing cycle. You then decide that an integrated amp is probably not the way to go and you decide to ditch it in favor of an amp/pre-amp setup. Later you realize "Wow these speakers are nice, but I really want a full range get up" then you have stereo subs 2 more amps an active cross-over and no money.

As far as being weird, I don't know I'm a pretty average guy, married, working, making less than $50K a year pretty "normal" I guess (no severed heads in my basement if that's what normal is!)

Last but not least, any self respecting audiophile fully and whole heartedly embraces the FACT that Vinyl is the superior format END OF STORY. Digital is merely a stop gap for those of us who can't afford a decent TT/phono stage etc. Anyone who thinks different is an amatuer posing as an audiophile.

5 for 5
Reply to this comment View reply
by rrh13 May 5, 2008 9:42 AM PDT
First of all, I am an audiophile and have been for most of my life. It is not about posing, or about always using the best format. It is about hearing the music as close to how it is supposed to sound. Vinyl is fantastic, if you have the opportunity to hear it with a good setup. Otherwise, it stinks. Being an audiophile is about trying to make the music sound as real as possible only, not about the other crap, although the tweaking can be fun. If your needs or circumstances preclude a $700 integrated amp, so be it. You can find fantastic speakers for $2-400, and great amps for that much, especially if you are willing to buy used. If you can afford this amp, or better, great. Once you have listened to music as it can sound at home, you just have to be willing to give up the big-watt claims of an amp to get great sound.
I have an iPod that I think is great (with over 9k mp3's on it). I also have been fortunate enough to have a top notch system. I can go anywhere and listen to my music. I even use it at home within my high-end set up. It has it?s place and it's time. But, when I can find 20 minutes to listen to music with no other constraints, like my 2.5 yr-old banging into my turntable, I will do so. But those times are rare. So, I have realized that for the next many years, since we are trying for another child, I will be limited to digital music (iPod, cd, or high quality downloads). That is just fine with me. That is what it is supposed to be about? hearing the music.
Remember, if you do not care how good it sounds, then you should be happy with that, also. My wife thought she could not tell the difference, until I took her with me to audition some of the equipment I bought. She could tell the difference between most products, especially speakers. But, she did not really care. So, she is not an audiophile. But, every day for a few minutes, I go listen to a something that sounds great, and I appreciate it for what it is? feeling very close to hearing live music.
Reply to this comment
by nrojas2 May 5, 2008 2:22 PM PDT
I'm currently in college now, and it really does sicken me to hear what young people around here consider "good quality." Personally, I think about 99% of my peers wouldn't know it if it slapped them in the face. Even just walking to class, as I carefully insert my Shure earbuds in (and I def. had to save my pennies for those on a college budget, but oh was it worth it!) I cringe at the sight of the hundreds of stock iPod headphones in people's ears. I don't know how many times someone is looking thru my DVD collection and sees my small collection of DVD-Audio discs and gives me a blank stare. Or wonder why I have lossless rips of CD's when "iTunes sounds pretty good." Sounds good my #$@. And the amazing thing is that I think you really don't have to spend that much just to get a basic idea of what good audio is like, and i don't think a lot of young people realize it. I have a Pioneer receiver hooked up to a $600 JBL surround set I built up over the years and sure, its good for cranking at parties and the like, but hooked up in my bedroom to my Mac I have a Denon receiver with some older Paradigm bookshelfs and when I play some nice lossless live tracks, people are amazed at how good it sounds. Yes, I do realize it is poor at best compared to some of the setups out there, but on my budget its good enough for me. And thats just the tip of the iceberg I tell them. Hooligans, when will they ever learn. 8-P
Reply to this comment
by Saaack May 5, 2008 4:54 PM PDT
Anyone who thinks that vinyl sounds good is clearly deaf. That explains why all the self proclaimed audiophiles are over 40, as our hearing degrades as we age. Once I hear someone talk about how great records sound I stop listening. Clearly deaf. Listening to cracks, pops, wow and flutter, limited dynamic range, and poor frequency response is not my idea of quality.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
by HevnHira May 5, 2008 10:22 PM PDT
!'m 16 and I found myself to be an audiophile at the poor age of 14. I got my first surround sound system at a Black Friday Sale at Frys. It's a Polk Audio 5 speaker set that sounds FANTASTIC and it was 200 dollars at 60% off. The Sub woofer is 12 inches and came free.

The Sony STR DG 510 is my amp and it is AWESOME. It has great reviews on CNET and was 50% for a price of 200 dollars. Fantastic Deal. To maximize the audio quality and increase functionality, I hooked the amp up to my turntable and my PC.

Turntable is an Audio-Technica, 250$. PC is standard with Creative Audio Blaster. I play 320 kbps MP3s and love the sound from both analog and digital. Of course I have an iPod and am dissapointed with the strict 120 kbps sound quality, but I purchased a Creative Zen Vision M for the 320 capabilities. Sony MDR V700 DJ headphones for listening fidelity as well.

Total cost: $1070 for the equipment.

Vinyl: 50$ (Rasputin's has a one dollar section with BRAND NEW records)

MP3's: Free (I'm a teenager what can you expect)
Reply to this comment
by make_or_break May 5, 2008 11:00 PM PDT
Anyone who thinks that vinyl sounds like crap is clear obstinate and saddled with ear drums damaged from spending way too many hours with way too cheap cans strapped to the side of their heads with the volume turned too high and the wax buildup thicker than what the maid staff normally does with a case of Pledge on that cheap dresser in Room 315 down at the local Holiday Inn. That explains why all the self-serving, spiteful anti-audiophiles are under the age of 40, as they are as yet too green and too dense to recognize quality even if it hit them smack between the ears, for with age comes the accumulation of wisdom and knowledge to know better that these too-young neophytes fail to grasp. Once I hear some punk talk about how great compressed MP3 files sound I find that I struggle to resist the urge to silence them permanently. Clearly morons wasting their audio time on Earth. Listening to folded, spindled, mutilated, flattened digital files created on a malware-infested Winbox with components several generations old should not be anyone's idea of quality. Yet too often it is, as spewed from the mouths of kiddies, and typically downloaded illegally to boot.
Reply to this comment
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right