My Back Pages

The Audiophile's Dilemma

David Fisher  |  Dec 10, 2024

This article is not about Seattle band The Head and the Heart (above). But read on . . .

Movie characters pondering momentous decisions are sometimes subjected to a raging debate between an imaginary angel on one shoulder and an imaginary devil on the other. Think of Larry "Pinto" Kroger deciding whether to take advantage of his passed-out-drunk date during the infamous Animal House toga party.

Audiophiles, too, are often pulled in opposite directions. But instead of angel's wings or devil's horns, our imaginary duelists are decked out in T-shirts, one with a logo that says "digital," the other with a logo that says "analog." Or tubes and transistors. Or that old favorite, Everything Matters vs Expensive Cables are Snake Oil.

I won't presume to adjudicate these perpetual rhubarbs, but I will confess to facing a battle of my own, waged between the Head and the Heart.

No, not the Seattle band (footnote 1).

Like many audiophiles, I became interested in quality music reproduction at a fairly young age. At this point I've pursued this beautiful obsession for roughly half a century, ever since a neighbor I looked up to returned from Vietnam and played his Garrard/Dynaco/Pioneer system for me. The sounds that system produced were way better than the record-munching Kenmore portable tucked away in the corner of our living room.

My first real audio system—48 years later I still remember that it cost $726.50—consisted of a BIC turntable, a Pioneer cassette deck, a Kenwood integrated amplifier, and a pair of Electro-Voice speakers. Starting there, over the years I've taken several steps up the ladder of performance (and cost).

Today, I am fortunate to enjoy what most consider a very good system: a Lyra cartridge, Origin Live turntable, Audio Research phono stage, Ayre Acoustics CD player, Ayre preamplifier and power amps, and Vandersteen 5A speakers, all tied together with upper-end AudioQuest cabling. (The relevance of this inventory will soon become clear.)

This current system is a big step up from the system that preceded it and all the systems that came before that, because I never felt comfortable investing this heavily until my kids were out of the house and their last tuition checks had cleared. I didn't want to have to say, sorry girls, your lab fees will be a little tardy because Dad needs a new power conditioner.

Despite having no way to confirm this, I imagine many Stereophile readers have taken, or are taking, similar journeys. My system is probably similar in quality and cost to systems owned and enjoyed by many other subscribers. They've probably smiled, as I have, when non-audiophile friends hear their favorite tunes played through our systems and are stunned. There's no better validation of our choices than hearing someone say, "It seems like they're right here in the room."

And yet.

Despite the listening pleasure my system delivers, despite its reasonably realistic soundstage, despite the emotional connection it provides to the music, I routinely suffer bouts of audiophilia nervosa. Its chief symptom, upgraditis, is chronic. It comes and goes, lurking just below the surface and flaring up when it's least convenient.

The Heart whispers, "you know, it could all be just a little bit better."

Maybe a tube preamplifier would improve imaging and timbre. Maybe more power would make those speakers sing more beautifully. A new cartridge, a couple of subwoofers, or, dare I say, some new interconnects might prove to be the last step needed to achieve musical satori. I peruse the ads, read the reviews, and watch as friends upgrade their systems. I audition other stereos—systems many, many times more elaborate, engaging, and expensive than my own. The wheels turn. My fingers graze the plastic card.

Then, just when things are about to get exciting, the Head weighs in. Intellectually, I know my current system is far enough up the food chain to be well across the border into the land of diminishing returns. I have no choice but to accept that my hearing, due in large part to the natural process of aging and probably in larger part to the effects of a misspent youth torturing my eardrums with too much volume, isn't what it once was. Sadly, it's not likely to improve. Those resources might be better spent on, say, travel. Or food.

Still, the Heart wants what the Heart wants.

The battle is real, and it's not limited to hardware. The same holds true for music—for me, particularly vinyl. With some 1500 records, my collection is a fraction of what other collectors own, but it's big enough to provide many more hours of listening pleasure than I realistically have. There are albums I absolutely love but must sheepishly admit I haven't played in decades.

Still, the Heart beats prestissimo when I learn of an upcoming album by a favorite band, or a treasured recording to be released (finally) on vinyl after previously being available only on CD, or when someone from my music club introduces me to an intriguing new artist. Pavlovian glands kick into overdrive as I read a review of the new, best-ever limited-edition remaster of a jazz classic that ever so slightly improves the bass over the previous best-ever limited-edition remaster, which I bought last year. Walking by a used record store inspires visions of a pristine copy of a classic first pressing hiding among the musty copies of more mundane albums. Thrift shops or yard sales beckon: My experience at those places has been comically bad, but hope springs eternal.

Am I—are we, since I know I'm not alone—doomed to accept that like Mick and Keef we can't get no satisfaction? Must we be satisfied with what we merely need? Can an audiophile ever be content?

That's a first-world question we all must answer for ourselves. For my part, it's going to take some time to ponder all the possibilities. As I do that, I might as well spin another LP. Suddenly I find myself longing to hear something by The Head and The Heart.

David Fisher is an Olympia, Washington, music lover who deals with his lack of musical talent by listening to his stereo with his wife Terri and their dog Layla.

Footnote 1:Get a T-shirt or a tote bag, or buy a record, at theheadandtheheart.com/collections/store.

COMMENTS
JohnnyThunder2.0's picture
Submitted by JohnnyThunder2.0 on December 10, 2024 - 5:30pm

I found solace that I am not alone...

cognoscente's picture
Submitted by cognoscente on December 11, 2024 - 5:54am

Those "discussions" about audio (hifi stereo sets, or that is should be mono of multi), who conducts them? Also women? Or only men? And then what kind?

I concluded years ago no matter how good and expensive your hifi stereo set is (and that is certainly not always the same thing, good and expensive, actually they have nothing to do with each other) your hifi stereo set remains artificial (reproduced music). And no matter how good your set is, if you (in your head) take a step back and listen again literal (as a just born baby) then you hear it that it is artificial, no matter if it is all analog or partly digital (which is analog as well, its stays electronic impulses, only through a different kind of transmission but whatever).

Two centuries ago, somewhere in the world (I know where but that does not matter) they took a person (someone who had not grown up with "images") to a museum and to a painting of a life-size and very lifelike image of a horse, as if it were a photo. They asked that person "what do you see"? "What do I see, what do you mean?" "Well, there on the wall, on the paiting". "Nothing, yes, spots of colored paint". "Don't you see a horse?" they asked. The person started laughing "A horse? Where, in here? Where then? Point me". In other words, already as babies almost we all grow up with images, pictures that our brains translate. If we hear a voice singing via a hifi stereo set, we only "think" we hear a voice because we have learned that. Our brains make a voice out of it. The same with a violin, piano or double bass, my favorite or punk-like loose rolling electric bassgitar but that is off topic. So in case of a hifi stereo set or whatever amplified reproduction of music, we think it. We think music. We translate what we hear. We fill it in. We "make" it real. But it isn't.

In other words, a voice, a violin, piano or double bass (or whatever) electronically reproduced via a hifi stereo set is artificial. Not real. Not natural. Never. No matter how good your set is. It is and stays artificial.

That is why a "natural" sounding device or set is nonsense, it is fooling ourselves. Fooling yourself. There is no thing as a natural sounding hifi stereo device or set. Natural sounding music is only an unamplified live concert. That is real. And deep down we know, feel and hear that (if we listen to amplified reproducted music). But we refuse to admit it and keep striving for "less artificial sounding music reproduction". Because that's just what it is: only "more less". Never the full real.

The same with artificial intelligence ....

But well, isn't music, communicating of emotions, also only learned? Is music "culture", in other words artificial, or is it "natural"?

So the heart (of David) wants something impossible. As long as he and you keep striving for the impossible (and listening to the heart instead of your ratio, and in this case to the sound instead of the music) you will never be able to enjoy (the music and the moment). I started to enjoy (the music again knowing it is just artificial, but it is what it is). You have to ask yourself: is it about the sound or the music? Is it about how (more) beautiful this moment could have been or about how beautiful this moment is?

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on December 12, 2024 - 2:16pm

as not being able to discern that an accurate painting is a representation of an animal either never existed or had a severe mental handicap. Humans have been making representational art of animals for at least 40,000 years. Not being able to recognize this art would be a sign of brain damage, severe mental handicap, or they were an ape someone thought was a human. I'm going to go with it never happened, try to do better.

sw23's picture
Submitted by sw23 on December 11, 2024 - 7:12am

A couple of points. I wish that the audiophile press would do a better job of covering the used market. What products have stood the test of time and still offer competitive performance? Which have particularly long service life etc. But I don’t suppose advertisers are keen to support that.

The other point is that I suppose if you spend a lot of time listening to live unamplified music primarily classical and jazz and you want exactly those qualities from your stereo rig you are setting a pretty high bar. But if you like me are a child of the sixties and seventies who grew up on rock n roll, the concerts we attend are primarily venues that feature PA systems. Today we have the tools to do a very credible job of recreating that experience in the home.

cognoscente's picture
Submitted by cognoscente on December 11, 2024 - 8:15am

(Almost) every hifi stereo set sounds better than amplified concerts. How many times have I gone to amplified concerts of music / bands that I know very well and asked myself the first part of the song "what song is this"? So bad it sounded. What we do during amplified concerts is translate what we hear live to how we hear it at home. So actually you hear live what and how it hears at home as you know it.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on December 11, 2024 - 10:15am

Hifi News & Record Review does reprint and compare and sometimes test(!) older gear over the decades and this serves as their 'where are they now' desire to dive into past gear. It's interesting for sure.

DaveinSM's picture
Submitted by DaveinSM on December 11, 2024 - 10:45am

I think the question of which products have stood the test of time is a bit of a loaded, subjective question.

I believe that continuing technological advancement has had the most impact on digital source components, with appreciable improvements in resolution and naturalization of the listening experience over the harshness and artificiality of early compact discs and music files.

While I’m sure that newer amplification technologies like Class D has also improved to make them more listenable- as well as provide efficient, cheap watts for higher power applications- there hasn’t been the same massive technological advancements on traditional forms of amplification like tubes and Class A/AB amplifiers. I’d imagine a cost-no-object used amp from several years ago would still be highly competitive with new designs today because the basic technology hasn’t really changed all that much.

Speaker design is such a mixed bag. Depending on your preferences and priorities, some would say that nothing beats an electrostatic design, something that was a revolutionary new technology decades ago. Others still stick to variations of traditional dynamic drivers for their relative strengths.

It seems that horns have come a long way, but at a cost of size and cost. There are still only so many practical ways to reproduce full range program material in a home setting with existing speaker designs. I’d say the most impactful “new” designs in recent years are sub/sats and actively amplified dynamic designs. Both were originated ostensibly to maximize performance for cabinet size, again to address practical limitations in home settings.

We are very lucky to be living in a time in which we have so many design choices now, as well as reference to older designs and technologies. Improvement is gradual and incremental, with trickle down technology allowing even budget products to have greater fidelity than comparable ones of the past.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on December 11, 2024 - 10:58am

I think it comes to identifying what you own vs. what you think you are missing.

Vandersteens, less the top models Treo on up, all have a 'bottom-up' sound bass to treble focus and vs a speaker like Magneplanars, are 'treble-down' to the core. Perhaps your appreciation has changed.

I know I was yearning for different with my Mirage 'bottom-down' speakers in the past, and I am definitely lacking something with even new Magnepan 1.7i's, modified to my liking. I am looking for different now and it really doesn't fit into the constant upgrade process thinking nor 'AN'. I've gotten much closer to the absolute sound and my transducer needs have changed.

I need something that does rock as well as jazz and I'll be looking at concentric designs in the future as I have pondered their existence for over 4 years now. A speaker that 'almost' does rock simply is a no-go for me, even at lower volumes and augmented with quality stereo subwoofers.

Time has passed for real assessments to emerge for me, over time.

Do this- Turn OFF your system for 1 week. Do Nothing.

Come back and tell me what you think after a week. You'll miss it like crack.

-
And it really does matter whether its accurate or beautiful; but one needs to make up their minds prior to aim for a goal you desire. 'What really is the balance of accuracy to beauty you require??'

But that goal may change over time. Accuracy may mean less as you age. Your room may have changed and therefore, the system/speaker sound changed.

It may mean that ones fetishistic tastes in the past are worth shit now. Having dipole speakers might be great, but just not in the planar line-source audio delivery system you own now.

You may want bipolar because you came to the decision that dipolar's delivery in room isn't what you are looking for because it introduces additives.

Or maybe it is as one's perceptions change. Dipolars bring 'live-r', reflected sound to where 'direct from source' was there previously.

As our needs change from education, we are stuck with systemic decisions we've made in the past and now it costs a lot of money to redo those past decisions- in an incremental, cost-effective way.

Great example for me is to keep my 1.7i's and get the KEF R11 Meta's as they more serve what I am looking for as an endgame system. My cables are terrific for the price and my ancillary equipment is almost there as well. I have pondered that finite endgame exists for a while now.

But needs shift on very critical things for anyone. A $1300 DAC is a great endgame piece for me if its a top performer and the top-quality cabling I use with it elevates the gear to where I want it. But I need a more robust analog playback multiples of that price and with a huge vinyl collection. They're not whims or 'AN'; they are value systems I refined over decades of investments and decision making. A high-value DAC for me approaches my higher-investment vinyl playback in the way that only quality digital can. In other ways, digital fails vs. analog for me.

It's an enigma (or a value system) that only you figure out by yourself- over time.

The same is true with live vs. reproduced. All vinyl playback is actually creating something in real time by its very mechanical nature. Digital will always be a simulacrum for me. That's me (not you).

But hearing The Smile live in an intimate theater was better than any stereo I have ever heard. And yet some great systems bring you that frisson that I experienced there.

Once we get over what reality doesn't bring to us when we demand, we find a wonderful place for both.

Ponder, indeed.

Ortofan's picture
Submitted by Ortofan on December 12, 2024 - 9:36am

... listening to jazz and get a pair of JBL L100 for rock music.

https://www.hifinews.com/content/jbl-l100-classic-loudspeaker

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on December 12, 2024 - 1:09pm

at least stop making such horrible recommendations.

The Mission 770 is vastly superior to the JBL L100 and they're about the same price.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mission-770-loudspeaker

Ortofan's picture
Submitted by Ortofan on December 12, 2024 - 4:24pm

... the better choice for the reproduction of rock music than the JBL L100?

Also, the L100 is available for $3,600/pr versus $5K for the 770.

At the $5K price point, I'd recommend the MoFi SourcePoint 888.

supamark's picture
Submitted by supamark on December 13, 2024 - 3:41pm

and I only use list price for comparisons, not sale prices. The Mission legit goes as down to 30 Hz - 1/2 octave below low E on a bass guitar, and is much more accurate. One measures like a quality modern loudspeaker and the other measures like dog crap. Plus, both are stand mount speakers, the 888 is a floor stander (which I've never heard, nor have I seen measurements of it so no comment).

Ortofan's picture
Submitted by Ortofan on December 14, 2024 - 10:23am

... the SourcePoint 888.

https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/mofi_soucepoint_888/

Garfield's picture
Submitted by Garfield on December 25, 2024 - 9:53am

After 30+ years in this hobby I consider myself a "former" audiophile. Now it's mainly about music. I replace components of the system only when they brake down. Listening to early Ella recordings as I write this.

X