- 17,133
- Posts
- 12
- Years
- Age 33
- Seen Jan 12, 2024
Defined as: "a person enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction. Audiophile values may be applied at all stages of music reproduction: the initial audio recording, the production process, and the playback, which is usually in a home setting."
Would you consider yourself an Audiophile? Are IEMs (in ear monitors) the only things that make music worthwhile? Do you have a graph that visualizes your preferences for highs, mids, and lows too?
I ask because my husband is a self-identified Audiophile, lol. For me, personally, I don't even have the eardrum(?) acumen to tell the difference between what he claims are "total opposites" in sound reproduction. It's often the case he gets new IEMs, insists I try them, and.. yeah it sounds fine I guess? Then I put my pink $8 earbuds back in. It's my theory that, as a musician, he has a more acute sense for sound and a much more developed understanding of what sounds good to him - so he highly values monitors that can produce his exact preference in music. Savoring the experience and claiming to hear something new and fascinating each time he listens to the same song but with different IEMs. In contrast my auditory faculties depend on whether the noise-marker bit is in my ear-hole.
So where do you sit on this spectrum? How important to you is the tech that defines your music listening experiences? If you do have IEMs, do you have a preferred brand? And if not do you think you'd be open to min-maxing your auditory experiences?
Or are you more like me and think that a lot of these devices sound the same? And however the music gets from where it's playing to your ears isn't such a big deal? Or otherwise just think aesthetics (cause pink amirite?!) and cost override that "high fidelity sound reproduction"?
Would you consider yourself an Audiophile? Are IEMs (in ear monitors) the only things that make music worthwhile? Do you have a graph that visualizes your preferences for highs, mids, and lows too?
I ask because my husband is a self-identified Audiophile, lol. For me, personally, I don't even have the eardrum(?) acumen to tell the difference between what he claims are "total opposites" in sound reproduction. It's often the case he gets new IEMs, insists I try them, and.. yeah it sounds fine I guess? Then I put my pink $8 earbuds back in. It's my theory that, as a musician, he has a more acute sense for sound and a much more developed understanding of what sounds good to him - so he highly values monitors that can produce his exact preference in music. Savoring the experience and claiming to hear something new and fascinating each time he listens to the same song but with different IEMs. In contrast my auditory faculties depend on whether the noise-marker bit is in my ear-hole.
So where do you sit on this spectrum? How important to you is the tech that defines your music listening experiences? If you do have IEMs, do you have a preferred brand? And if not do you think you'd be open to min-maxing your auditory experiences?
Or are you more like me and think that a lot of these devices sound the same? And however the music gets from where it's playing to your ears isn't such a big deal? Or otherwise just think aesthetics (cause pink amirite?!) and cost override that "high fidelity sound reproduction"?
