The audiophile's experience

Understand the industry and identify your goals

 The term ‘high-end’ was said to be coined by the late great Harry Pearson (HP) founder of 'the absolute sound' (TAS) magazine. TAS is a well-respected US audio magazine (distributed internationally) that caters specifically to the audiophile community. I believe the term ‘high-end’ was used to replace 'high-fidelity' which was loosely used by the consumer electronics industry bent on selling their products. In short, the term ‘Hi-Fi’ has ironically lost its value and is shunned by audiophiles even being a derogatory word suggesting a substandard system.

High-end audio product designers may be characterized as follows:

 

Today, High-End audio refers to products that are used by audiophiles to re-produce recorded music that is resolving. I would like to use the term "high-resolution" instead, and in this respect may refer to recordings or audio products. Various models are made available for the same product group which I believe will allow wider participation for audiophiles with varying budgets and musical preferences. Nevertheless, I believe they are interpretations of what the designer thinks is the best performance available at that price point narrowing the gap toward audio excellence. I also believe that price or brand alone does not equate to high-resolution audio but a variety of considerations should be taken together in unison to create a high-resolution audio system, read my article on Foundation/The Audiophile's Practices. However, it may be said that the degree to which a high-end audio designer reaches closer to their ideal, the product would cost more because of the cost and quality of parts notwithstanding which, the principle of diminishing marginal returns applies in terms of quantifying its resolution, i.e., the degree of performance gains do not correlate to the degree of price increases. See also my article on Foundation/The Audiophile Principles for a discussion on diminishing marginal returns and another of my article on Resources/The Audiophile's Budget, the latter discussing the various categories of high-resolution audio systems.


Audio Consumption

It is instructive at this point to highlight the 2 main industries with their corresponding trades that provide audio for consumption (see the following chart).  This will show how audiophiles fit into the scheme of things by providing some perspective. Unlike the consumer electronics industry that we belong to, the Professional Audio (Pro-audio) industry comprises professional audio engineers in many related disciplines that do research, design, consultancy, and manufacturing. They are steep on specifications and measurements with conformance to international pro-audio industry standards and best practices driven by audio engineering societies and related associations. They use test benches, anechoic chambers, and computer programs to better articulate the characteristics of an audio product and a given design. Their focus, however, is on integration (compatibility), intensity (dynamic range), and safety, not entirely rooted in sound quality but for some exceptions like studio recording audio components.


On the other hand, consumer audio has not relied on specification sheets for products because the consumer doesn’t fully understand them as there is no common standard cited as a reference point. The specification sheets show measurement standards that vary from country to country and from different manufacturers. Some shady manufacturers have even resorted to ‘massaging’ their specification sheets for marketing purposes mostly in the areas of omission. Suffice it to say the audio quality of any given component is highly subjective which is room-dependent (see my article on Rule 3: loudspeaker placement and Rule 4: Room acoustic management (Scaffold), and integration with other quality components, to include the listener's loudness level and music preferences.

audio consumption chart

The case for subjectivity

For high-resolution audio, we focused on subjective aspects of sound quality instead of objective measurements the latter of which is meaningless in the real-home environment. Our industry has developed many adjectives to best describe music reproduction mostly informed by high-end audio publications and related media, and none of those adjectives describing sound attributes can be objectively measured. Probably the closest semblance to objectivity is our practice of A/B/A comparisons, blind testing, and even double-blind to inform us which is also listening and not reading measurements. Read my article on audiophile principles (Foundation) for a discussion in this regard. It is common knowledge that products that measure well may not sound as good and even for our liking. It is pertinent to note that microphones used to create recordings are mono instruments and our ears listen in stereo (two ears). They are both different instruments used for hearing, our ears are much more sensitive and complex which is linked to our brains where interaural delay helps us perceive both location and depth. We also have the power of discernment and we adjust on the fly in our heads. The microphone is predictable, different make, models, and designs have different characteristics in their ability to capture sound. They have a distinct set of parameters already programmed and can never replicate the processing power of our ear and brain working in tandem in this instance to translate music as we understand it.


8 attributes of a high-resolution system

This beg the question; how do we know that a system or component sounds good or is better? I have learned over the years the kinds of sonic values that audiophiles care about and some of the stated design goals of high-end audio manufacturers. Therefore, I have taken the liberty to humbly put together the following 8 attributes of a high-resolution audio system. The following 8 listings (see illustration) have no rank order. I must also qualify that not all recordings used would reveal all of these traits but relevant audiophile-quality recordings (Read my article Resources/Reference Recordings). If you are a practicing audiophile for many years, you should be able to check off most if not all of these attributes. This is how you know that you have arrived at your destination. This checklist will also help you understand where you are before where you could potentially be in the quest for good sound.

1.  When the loudspeakers “disappear” (Where have all the loudspeakers gone?)

At audio playback levels, and with audiophile-quality recordings, the performers should conjure behind and not cling to the loudspeakers. You will hear performers spread across a soundstage as panned by the mixing engineer having a sense of space and layers of depth between them. 


2.  Absence of “listeners’ fatigue” (Having peace of mind)

There is no compulsion to shut down and "rest" the tired ears even after prolonged listening periods. You are not easily distracted or fidgety when listening. However, you may be irritated with poorer-quality recordings that would cause you to jump tracks on digital or change albums for analog. 


3.  Distinguishable musical contrast (All about being transparent)

You can easily distinguish between contrasting tones and loudness between audio components and on quality recordings. You do not hear a consistent signature sound e.g., one-note bass, bright or thin treble, or a horn-like or recess midrange usually an indicator of a forgiving system. At times, you may have to turn the volume up or down to maintain your normal playback levels because recordings often differ in their loudness levels, especially on modern recordings, of which many mastering engineers are pressured by the artist/producers to enter the fight in the “loudness wars”. If you used a known poor recording such as bright sounding recording or boomy bass, and your system produced a pleasant sound then your system may be said to be forgiving. If the recording is dark and your system sounds bright, then you may have a bright-sounding system. If the said recordings sound bad as they should be, then you may have a transparent system. 


4.   Able to follow the rhythm (It doesn't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing)

Even on softer-recorded passages, you can follow the bass line. On relevant audiophile-quality recordings, you would involuntarily tap your foot to the music or be tempted to move your head/body to the rhythm of a musical beat. Music would have a relative sense of rhythm and pace that you can easily follow. 


5.  Experiencing moments of awe (Shock and awe)

On relevant audiophile-quality recordings, during the softest and or loudest passages, you feel "goosebumps" or experience "jaw-dropping" episodes. You feel surprised/shocked by a sudden burst of a crescendo, and be able to follow the sustain thereafter and hear the decay of that musical note. On low bass notes, you will feel the punch and the low end transiting through your body also known as haptics.


6.  Absence from the room ‘noise’ (Silence is golden)

You should not hear peripheral noise coming from within your house and into the listening space or from outside your house invading the listening space. Your noise floor at the sweet spot should not be more than 40db as measured by an SPL meter at the designated listening seat (sweet spot). This will enable you to hear the subtleties (aka detail) in music coming from a darker background when extraneous noise is absent. 


7.  Unable to hear buzz/hum coming from the loudspeakers (Deliver us from evil)

When your system is turned on and the volume set at playback levels (between 70 to 75 dB) without playing music, you will not hear any distinct high-frequency buzz emanating from the tweeters or low-frequency hum from the woofers when you are squatting no more than a meter away from those respective drivers. These sounds are distortion coming either from your powerline and modulated through your electronics or by the electronic parts inside your components. Read my article on Scaffold/Rule 6 – Power line conditioning. Like attribute number 6 earlier, you will be able to hear more details with an ambient report of the recording venue on relevant recordings. 


8.  Able to easily pick out each performer within the soundstage (Virtual reality)

Performers within the soundstage are not blended but instead have their own "dark space” and “time” (spatial body). Musical instruments have a sense of “air” around them as they appear within the soundstage. The imaging of each performer within the soundstage is palpable, well-delineated i.e., clearly outlined with edges intact and not diffused i.e., full-bodied.


Conclusion

An audiophile's end goal is to achieve a coherent representation of the recording space as the mixing engineer intended (panned into the mix). This is how we justify our time, money, and energy in the pursuit of audio bliss, benefiting from a return on our investment like any other hobby or sport. This will provide a sense of achievement and satisfaction. I believe many audiophiles would agree that those 8 attributes discussed best describe a high-resolution system. The more attributes you can identify, the higher is, the resolution of your audio system. These attributes should be your focus in your journey instead of being brand conscious or believing that higher cost, good specifications, or measurements equate to better sound. Have practical objectives instead of chasing technology, or being distracted by award-winning products. The flavor of the month/year products does not further your interest but a proper setup and integration will. Now that you have the following targets to shoot for, apply, listen, and reflect. This is the audiophile’s experience and your journey begins here.


The next companion article, "The Audiophile’s Practices" maps out a practical way forward for those who are already journeying or would like to start their journey toward audio bliss.


Questions?

Email

dennis@hearasia.com

 to request more information or to provide feedback