Francais | English | Espanõl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Audiophile, from Latin audire "hear" and Greek philos "loving," is a person dedicated to achieving high fidelity in the recording and playback of music [1] [2].

Contents 1 Audiophile beliefs 2 Consumer practices 2.1 Sound sources 2.2 Amplifiers 2.3 Loudspeakers 2.4 Accessories 2.5 Headphones 3 Professional practices 4 Current trends 5 Objective versus subjective 5.1 Objectivists' criticisms of subjectivism 5.2 Subjectivists' criticisms of objectivism in audio 6 See also 7 References 8 External links 8.1 Objectivist 8.2 Subjectivist

[edit] Audiophile beliefs

Audiophile values may be applied at all stages of the chain—the initial audio recording, the production process, and the playback, which is usually in a home setting. High-end is commonly applied to audiophile vendors, products, and practices. There is much skepticism inside and outside the audiophile community as to whether these practices and products have the claimed effects on the listening experience, and there are often accusations of self-delusion. The skeptics are referred to as objectivists. Those who generally subscribe to audiophile values are referred to as subjectivists. People on both sides of the debate concede that because many audiophiles are laymen, they are vulnerable to exploitation by fanciful claims made by unethical vendors. Audiophool is commonly used to describe subjectivist extremists.

One statement that has influenced many audiophile values ^{[citation needed]} is from Harry Pearson, longtime editor of The Absolute Sound:

"We believe that the sound of music, unamplified, occurring in a real space is a philosophic absolute against which we may judge the performance of devices designed to reproduce music."

Audiophiles widely share the belief that even the world's best music-reproduction equipment currently falls far short of this ideal.

Even given agreement on the goal, opinions vary widely among designers and listeners on how best to achieve it. If there is one shared design principle, it is minimalism. Given that capturing, storing, and playing back music inevitably degrades it, the fewer and simpler the stages, the better. Audiophile gear, for example, almost universally lacks tone control circuits, since it is felt that these can only degrade the audio quality while moving the sound away from the ideal.

Audiophiles agree that the room in which the playback system works is of great importance to the sound quality. There is a wide variety of room-treatment products available to address this issue, and extreme audiophiles are known to use purpose-built listening rooms.

[edit] Consumer practices

[edit] Sound sources

Audiophiles regularly listen to music from compact discs (CDs), records, and frequency-modulation (FM) radio. Since the early 1990s, CDs have become the most common source of high-quality music, making records obsolete. Due to record collectors, the extensive back-catalogue of recordings on records not available on CDs, and the perceived better sound quality of records among many subjectivists, records remain popular for a minority of listeners. The debate is particularly sharp in this area, with analog proponents claiming a warmer analog sound and loss of information in the sampling process in digital sound, while digital proponents decry analog formats as lacking dynamic range and having greater deviations in frequency response. Nevertheless, turntables, tonearms, and cartridges are among the most exotic and lavish high-end audio products available today.

The 44.1 kHz sampling rate of the CD format, in theory, restricts CDs' information losses to above the theoretical upper-frequency limit of human hearing of approximately 20 kHz (see Nyquist limit). It should be noted that most audiophiles are in their thirties or older and highly unlikely to be able to hear beyond 18 kHz. Some critics argue that there are still deleterious effects on the sound quality at this sampling rate. Newer formats such as DVD-Audio and Super Audio Compact Disc (SACD) with sampling rates of 96 kHz or higher have been developed in an attempt to address this criticism.

Despite the popularity of MP3 digital-audio players such as iPods, some audiophiles dislike listening seriously to music in these formats due to what they believe is degraded sound quality. The digital compression used is a compromise between storage capacity and sound quality, as information lost due to the lossy data compression used is proportional to the compression rate used. In general, audiophiles try to avoid such loss of audio information as much as possible.

Audiophiles who own a digital audio player will often encode their music at higher bit rates to maintain sound quality at acceptable levels for casual listening. The use of lossless-compression algorithms such as FLAC, Monkey's Audio (APE), Apple Lossless, Windows Media Audio 9 Lossless, and Shorten are also common.

While many digital-audio devices have integrated converters, a healthy demand exists for after-market digital-to-analog converters for those who prefer an analog sound.

[edit] Amplifiers

Many audiophile systems separate the functions of the preamplifier—which selects audio signals and has a volume control—and the power amplifier, which takes a line-level audio signal and drives the loudspeakers. Some audiophiles use two monophonic power amplifiers in a monoblock configuration, rather than one stereophonic power amplifier. Some audiophiles use no preamplifier, instead connecting a CD player with a variable output directly to a power amplifier. Some go even further and use multiple amplifiers per loudspeaker to drive the woofer, midrange, tweeter, and so on. There are, however, those who claim advantages in the use of integrated amplifiers that combine the functions of a preamplifier and a power amplifier in a single box, arguing on the basis of an appeal to minimalism.

Audiophile amplifiers are available based on solid-state (semiconductor) technology, vacuum-tube (valve) technology, or hybrid technology—semiconductors and vacuum tubes. The amount of power required is moot. Very low power single-ended triode tube amplifiers are often claimed to provide superb sound when paired with appropriately sensitive loudspeakers. On the other hand, there are others who use solid-state amplifiers rated at over 1,000 watts RMS per channel. Some subjectivists believe that tube amplifiers, despite their much higher distortion, produce a more faithful and detailed reproduction in comparison to solid-state amplifiers. Objectivists respond that this is largely a matter of opinion and personal taste, not proper reproduction of sound. Tube amplifiers, however, are heavily used in music production, primarily in guitar amplifiers because of their soft clipping when overdriven, compared to solid-state circuitry.

[edit] Loudspeakers

Audiophile loudspeakers use a wide variety of technologies and range in size from tiny to room-filling. The availability of high-priced, exotic designs is most extreme in the loudspeaker category. It is perfectly possible to spend more than $100,000 USD on a pair of high-end loudspeakers. Starting at prices well under $500, budget audiophile loudspeakers are also widely available, and are often the beneficiaries of more advanced technologies developed for higher priced flagship designs.

In contrast to consumer oriented audiophile speakers, monitor speakers used by professional audio engineers rarely exceed a price of over $5000 USD for a pair.

The loudspeaker is as important a link in the audiophile-equipment chain as the other main components (input source and amplifier). If the loudspeaker is not of high quality, the sound reproduced may not be accurate and the quality of the rest of the equipment therefore can only be guessed at.

Loudspeaker designs include closed-box, bass reflex, electrostatic, ionic, horn-loaded, and open baffle.

[edit] Accessories

There is a wide variety of accessories used by audiophiles in the hope of getting better sound, often referred to as "tweaks". The most common — and among the most controversial — are expensive high-end audio cables used for electrical power, line-level, loudspeaker, and digital-signal connections. Other accessories include filters to clean the electricity used by the gear, equipment stands to isolate components from room vibrations, and room treatments. Room treatments typically consist of sound-absorbing materials placed strategically within a listening room to reduce the amplitude of early reflections, giving the illusion of a larger space, and removing sound coloration. Room treatments can be expensive and difficult to optimize, but are considered by many to be the least "tweaky" of the many available tweaks, since their effectiveness is easily measured and grounded in verifiable science.

[edit] Headphones

Another, less expensive, practice of some audiophiles is the use of premium headphones. While sometimes outlandish in price (as high as $10,000), most headphones marketed to audiophiles are a tiny fraction of the cost of comparable speaker systems, and do not require any room adjustment beyond a quiet environment for music enjoyment. Well-known high-end headphones are considered to offer audiophile quality for prices well under a thousand dollars. Some feel that the performance of high-end headphones is improved by the use of dedicated headphone amplifiers and cables. Newer canalphones, while as expensive as their larger counterparts and considered more limited in soundstage and other characteristics, can be driven by less powerful outputs like portable devices, and have a growing use among audiophiles.

[edit] Professional practices

Audiophiles tend to hold commercial-music recording practices in low regard. Particularly in the pop-music domain, most recordings are based on the heavy use of multitrack technology, the studio dominated by a huge mixing board with as many as eighty channels, each channel operating in the digital domain and subjected to a wide variety of tonal and "effects" processing. Audiophiles believe that this complex signal chain degrades the quality of the signal and lessens the spontaneity and integrity of the musical performance. There are some professional musicians and audio engineers that agree with this view. Currently-active recording artists who apply audiophile recording principles include Neil Young, and the Cowboy Junkies.

Techniques applied by audiophile recording engineers include the use of exotic high-end microphones, the use of a smaller rather than greater number of microphones, the use of tube-driven rather than solid-state electronics, and the use of a minimal amount of processing in the production chain.

[edit] Current trends

In terms of revenue, the mainstream electronics business is now dominated by multi-channel home theater rather than two-channel stereo sound. Almost every major vendor has introduced a full line of home-theater products, even those who traditionally eschewed such products. The degree to which this phenomenon has happened varies from country to country. It is probably most advanced in the United States, and less so in the United Kingdom and other countries. Audiophiles and non-audiophiles alike still buy high quality two channel systems as well as incorporate large floorstanding loudspeakers into their surround sound system.

Audiophiles are interested in newer higher-bandwidth digital-recording formats such as SACD and DVD-Audio. These formats encode music at data rates of 24-bit / 96 kHz or even 192 kHz compared to 16-bit / 44.1 kHz for CDs, and thus are referred to as high-resolution audio formats. Because manufacturers have failed to agree on a single format, because there are relatively few releases in these formats, and possibly also because audiences consider CDs to be good enough as is, acceptance so far has been limited. The improvements offered by these higher-resolution formats, while supposedly audible to listeners when using equipment that, for the average person, would require a mortgage, have recently been diminished by the continued refinement of the standard CD audio technology, at both the recording/production and playback stages. In particular, higher-quality DACs, analog stages, and upsampling features have elevated the standard CD to near-audiophile levels.

[edit] Objective versus subjective

Almost every audiophile belongs to one of the two camps. Objectivists believe that gear, accessories, and treatments must pass rigorously-conducted double-blind tests to meet the claims made by their adherents. Subjectivists, however, believe that careful individual listening is an appropriate tool for discovering the true worth of a device or treatment.

[edit] Objectivists' criticisms of subjectivism

• Every properly conducted and interpreted double-blind test has failed to support subjectivists' claims of significant or extremely subtle sonic differences between devices if measurements alone predict that there should be no sonic differences between the devices when listening to music<ref>"The Ongoing Debate about Amplifier "Sound"", Ian G. Masters, September 1 2002.</ref> [3].
• The conduct of listening tests are subject to a great number of variables, and results are notoriously unreliable. Thomas Edison, for example, showed that entire theater audiences were unable to distinguish between the sound of an orchestra or a playback by his recording system [4], which today would be regarded as primitive in quality.
• Similarly, results of component evaluation between various listeners or even the same listener under different circumstances cannot be easily replicated. This contrasts with the superficially similarly esoteric oenophile world where repeatability of blind tests is surprisingly good [5].
• Measured-audio distortion is immensely higher in electromechanical components such as microphones, turntables, tonearms, phono cartridges, and loudspeakers than in purely electronic components such as preamplifiers and power amplifiers, making it logically more difficult for objectivists to accept that very subtle differences in the latter can have an appreciable effect on overall musical reproduction quality.
• Similarly, the acoustic behavior of the listening room—the interaction between loudspeakers and the room's acoustics—and the interaction between an electromechanical device (loudspeaker) and an electronic device (amplifier) are subjected to many more variables than between electronic components. Thus the "difference" in sound quality between amplifiers is actually the ability of an amplifier to interface well with loudspeakers or a lucky combination of loudspeaker, amplifier, and room that works well together [6].
• It is difficult, but very important, to match sound levels before comparing systems, as minute increases in loudness—more than 0.1dB—have been demonstrated to cause perceived improvements in sound quality.
• Subjectivists often reject attempts to categorize differences in sound using measurements. They have repeatedly ignored the work of such audiophile engineers as Bob Carver, who has shown that by tailoring the transfer function of any system with a relatively simple sound-shaping network, they can make it sound indistinguishable from another system as requested [7] [8].
• Solid-state amplifiers are often not used for guitars due to the harsh sound created by an overdriven solid-state amplifier compared to valve. In high fidelity, subjectivists often prefer vacuum-tube electronics over solid-state electronics, because despite inferior measured performance, the subjectivists claim a warmer or more musical sound. Vacuum-tube amplifiers are often attacked as inferior because, in addition to their substantially higher total harmonic distortion, they require rebiasing, are less reliable, generate more heat, are less powerful, and are often more expensive<ref>"The Ongoing Debate about Amplifier "Sound"", Ian G. Masters, September 1 2002.</ref>.
• Subjectivists regularly make strong claims for the allegedly superior quality of analog music reproduction from records played on turntables compared to digital music reproduction from CDs played on CD players despite digital's absence of clicks, pops, wow, flutter, audio feedback, or rumble. Digital also has a higher signal-to-noise ratio, has a wider dynamic range, has less total harmonic distortion, and has a flatter and more extended frequency response<ref>"The Decline of Vinyl and Its Timely Death", Ian G. Masters, January 1 2003.</ref><ref>"Vinyl Hooey", Ian G. Masters, April 15 2005.</ref>.
• Some audiophile-equipment designers are obsessed over seemingly irrelevant details. Many components, for instance, are able to reproduce frequencies higher than the limit of human hearing—20 kHz<ref> "Hearing Loss", Timothy C. Hain, MD., February 26 2006. </ref>. Some sources, such as FM radio, will not reproduce frequencies higher than 15 or 16 kHz.
• While some subjectivists' practices may seem driven by fashion—e.g., the late eighties' vogue of marking the edges of CDs with a green felt marker or suspending cables above the floor on small racks—objectivists argue that the laws of physics are immutable<ref>Bewaring of the Green. Snopes.com (May 15 - June 15 1990).</ref>.
• Notwithstanding benefits, some audiophile products’ prices strain credulity: at the ultra-high end, it is possible to spend over a hundred thousand dollars for loudspeakers, tens of thousands for amplifiers and CD players, and more than a thousand dollars for a power cable [9] [10].
• At the lunatic subjectivist fringe, some vendors of products destined for the most obsessed audiophile make fanciful and unscientific claims for their products. Tice Audio, for example, once sold what appeared to be an ordinary clock radio which, it was claimed, would change "electron energy levels," thereby improving the quality of a playback system if plugged into the same electrical circuit<ref>"Flights of High-End Audio Fancy", Ian M. Masters, November 1 2002.</ref>. PWB Electronics [11] markets pebbles which are claimed to improve sonic performance when placed anywhere in rooms where audio components are present.
• Vendors of audio cables probably make the most outlandish claims for alleged improvements in sound quality. Nordost [12], for example, makes claims as to the transmission speeds of their cables and the purity of the copper used to justify prices of several thousands of dollars per metre for their "reference products." Some audio cables are filled with oil or water, glow in the dark, or come with a separate AC cord which must be plugged in to power the cable. Some have such lavish appearances that to the connoisseur of cables, they can be considered audio jewelry<ref> "Audio Cables - Science or Religion?", Gene DellaSala, August 30 2004. </ref>.
• Some subjectivists' claims, while superficially based on accepted physical principles, apply them to circumstances where they are irrelevant. The skin effect, for instance, which relates the efficiency of cables to the frequency transmitted, is often applied to audio frequencies where it is insignificant [13].
• Many of the most outspoken subjectivists, including reviewers, columnists, and "pundits," lack engineering training and objective credentials, and most will fully admit a lack of understanding as to the technical merits of what they are analyzing, but nevertheless praise a product's innovation and performance [14].
• Counterintuitively, subjectivists claim, but cannot substantiate, that loudspeaker (and indeed any other) cable is directional, giving better sonic performance in one direction.
• Subjectivists often claim that home-theater sound is inferior to high-fidelity sound, even though double-blind tests have shown that this is wrong. Many subjectivists believe that the sound from records is superior to the sound from home theater. Subjectivists often look down on home-theater sound even though many subjectivists accept FM radio as high fidelity [15] [16].
• The majority of audiophiles are men over 35, which is the part of the population with the worst hearing. Men have worse hearing than women, and hearing worsens irreversibly with age.

Overall, the subjectivists' world is looked upon by objectivists as being a hotbed of gullibility and fraud, its marketing engine driven primarily by either a constant desire for one-upmanship or a more benign desire to tinker with equipment. In particular, the tinkering drive is fed by wild claims for minor parts of the system such as cables. Objectivists, however, are often harshly dismissed by subjectivists as meter men—people who simply refuse to recognize what the subjectivists consider obvious. The debate is rather heated in certain quarters, and even the well-known sceptic James Randi chimed in on the issue [17].

[edit] Subjectivists' criticisms of objectivism in audio

• Subjectivists will rely on demonstrations and comparisons, but believe there are problems in applying double-blind methods to comparisons of audio devices. They believe that a relaxing environment and sufficient time measured in days or weeks is necessary for the discriminating ear to do its work.
• The introduction of switching apparatus, with either metal connection (mechanical switches) or electronic processing (solid-state switches), may obscure the differences between the two signal sources being tested.
• While tube electronics are less linear than solid-state electronics at high signal levels, they are much more linear at output levels of less than one watt. Most musical signals spend most of the time at these low levels. Subjectivists claim that "The first watt from an audio amplifier is the most important watt, and amplifiers whose distortion declines with lower power tend to sound better."
• Oft quoted in the past, the correlation of total harmonic distortion with perceived sound quality has not been established by scientific testing. Since the 1970's, there has been a general consensus that an amplifier with 0.01% total harmonic distortion may not sound "better" than one with 0.1% total harmonic distortion. Subjectivists argue that the type of distortion is more relevant^{[citation needed]}. For instance, distortion by even (for example second or fourth order) harmonics have been shown to be less objectionable than distortion by odd (for example, third or fifth order) harmonics. This argument shows that subjectivists are perfectly capable of accepting scientific and engineering principles in those cases when they are relevant to the subjectivists' perceptions of sound quality.
• In general, proponents of the latest technological solutions, such as the CDs at their introduction, use the technology's theoretical or ideal behavior, whereas subjectivists’ criticism centre on actual behavior. Subsequent introduction of newer, improved components often are marketed as lacking the problems existing with the prior generation of equipment, notwithstand this having been described as audibly perfect at the time. For instance:
  • audio filtering Subjectivists who defend analogue formats over digital ones point out that the process of reconverting a bit-stream to an analog waveform requires heavy filtering to remove spurious high-frequency information and such filtering would involve some signal degradation due to loss of information and potentially large amount of phase shift in the upper reaches of the passband. They point out that commonly-used consumer-grade digital-to-analog converters (DACs) exhibit very poor linearity at low levels. Both problems, at first dismissed, were then addressed by such solutions as digital filtering, oversampling, and the use of DACs operating at 20-bit (or higher) resolution. The introduction of the new higher-bandwidth high-resolution music formats is a tacit admission of the reality of this issue. Musician Neil Young, for example, is a harsh critic of the sound of the original CD format but has approved of the sound of the newer SACD format.
  • excessive feedback Subjectivists have long believed that sound quality is degraded by large levels of negative feedback in amplifiers. While this is untrue in the general case, poorly designed feedback systems can produce poor sound quality. Thus, the association of feedback with poor sound quality is likely a reflection of the availability of poorly designed power amplifiers that use feedback incorrectly.
  • capacitor types Subjectivists have long believed the improvement in sound they heard with higher-quality capacitors such as those made with tantalum. Sound quality improved when inferior large electrolytics or paper capacitors were replaced or bypassed with these improved capacitors in the signal path. Subjectivists believe that the capacitors were inferior due to significant inductance caused by their spiral-wound construction which interferes with the passage of the highest audio frequencies.
• Measurements commonly made by magazines such as Audio and Stereo Review may not be directly relevant or discriminating enough to be correlated with good/bad sound. Techniques and measurements used by High-end audio companies such as Spectral Audio, Wilson Audio and Goldmund for testing their components and equipment are allegedly far more complex than those in the public domain e.g. total harmonic distortion, transient intermodulation distortion, but remain closely guarded secrets.
• Subjectivists were experimenting with improved power supplies for CD players in the early days of the medium long before it was validated by manufacturers. Concerned that the power supply's voltage fluctuations produced by the motor's load would affect the digital section's internal digital clock, causing jitter and audible distortion, some tried to isolate the digital section around the DAC from the CD drive's mechanical section to hence improve sound quality.
• Measurable and clearly audible levels of very objectionable distortion were demonstrated early in the digital-audio era by simply running a signal source through an analog-to-digital converter and back again through a digital-to-analog converter. ^{[citation needed]}.
• Subjectivists were experimenting with room acoustics (sonic dampening, speaker positioning) long before component manufacturers began to consider them a factor influencing sound quality.
• Subjectivists noted the differences in response speed between various loudspeaker drivers used within a single loudspeaker system and began experimenting with fewer drivers, stepped loudspeaker boxes, and so on.
• Many vendors and retailers who offer free trials or money-back guarantees remain in business.
• Experienced listeners can be relied upon for valid subjective advice on how equipment sounds. In any event, the eventual purchase decision will be made by the end-user, whose "perception is reality".
• Humans respond physiologically to frequencies much higher than 20 kHz, and seemingly inaudible overtones can add realism to the listening experience ^{[citation needed]}.

Many subjectivists admit that, like with many other hobbies, their pastime contains a measure of cultish behavior. They may also admit that there is charlatanry among some vendors.

In Asia, hi-fi ownership and upgrading is often a hobby in its own right, where the pursuit of sound fidelity seems to be almost completely disassociated from the love of music. These "audiophiles" are solely into the gear. The music is just considered incidental or a means of "testing" equipment. The Chinese refer to this hobby as 發燒 or "fever outbreak."

The gulf between subjectivists and objectivists continues. Audio magazine, one of the few which combined lengthy listening reviews with lengthy technical analysis of laboratory measurements, has ceased publication. Stereophile, however, which combines subjectivism with laboratory measurements, still publishes monthly.

[edit] See also

• Analog sound vs. digital sound Brief discussion of differences.
• Audio system measurements
• DIY audio Enthusiasts make their own equipment.
• High-end audio Audiophile gear and internal links to audio companies.
• Valve sound
• Videophile

[edit] References

<references/>

[edit] External links

[edit] Objectivist

• The Audio Critic - Thirty-year publication, now online only, with in-depth independent verification of manufacturers' claims.
• The Audio Press - Criticism of industry and subjectivist magazines and reviewers. Written by a subjectivist, but makes many points objectivists agree with.
• Audiophile BS - Audiophile nonsense.
• Bogus Audiophile Products.
• Boston Audio Society - Scientific approach to the hobby.
• The Cable Lie.
• Cable Myths - (PDF).
• Cable Nonsense.
• Dispelling Popular Audio Myths.
• Do All Amplifiers Sound the Same? - Double-blind test (PDF).
• Humorous account of digital audio (CD-DA), etc. - From the sci.electronics FAQ.
• Lies, Damn Lies, and Cables - The wire controversy.
• Science and Subjectivism in Audio Technically-detailed article by Douglas Self.
• Speaker Cables: Can You Hear the Difference? - Double-blind test (PDF).
• Speaker Wire.
• The Ten Biggest Lies in Audio - (PDF).
• TestDisc.com - Audiophile test CDs, software, books, and setup gear.

[edit] Subjectivist

• The Absolute Sound - Second-oldest high-end magazine.
• American Wired - Newest and most mainstream of the high-end review publications.
• Audio Asylum - "Inmates" discuss all that is high-end.
• The Audio Circuit - Information on and user reviews of loudspeakers, headphones, amplifiers, and playback equipment.
• AudioCircle - Forum.
• Audiogon - Marketplace and forum.
• Audiophile Manufacturer Links - Extensive quantity of high-end audio manufacturer links.
• Audiophilia - Equipment reviews and articles of general interest to audiophiles.
• AudioReview - Reviews of home-theater and audio equipment, forums, gallery, and marketplace.
• Avid Listener: Audiophile Bookmarks - Directory of high-end audio manufacturers, distributors, stores, and information.
• Enjoy the Music.com - High-end audio equipment, music reviews, show reports, and information.
• Fedeltà del Suono - Italian magazine dedicated to high fidelity and high-end equipment.
• Head-Fi - Forum for high-fidelity products with emphasis on headphones and portable audio.
• Positive Feedback Online - Print magazine that merged with audioMUSINGS and morphed into an online forum for the audio arts.
• 6Moons.com - Online magazine.
• Stereo | 411 - High-end audio and video resources.
• Stereophile - Largest, oldest, and most read subjectivist magazine includes online reviews and articles.
• StereoTimes - Equipment reviews and articles of general interest to audiophiles.
• TNT-Audio - Non-profit, Internet high-fidelity review.es:Audiófilo

ja:オーディオマニア nl:Audiofiel pl:Audiofil pt:Audiófilo sv:Audiofil