Ken Rockwell has decent chops. He is a musician, was a recording engineer, built consoles and, yes, worked in radio. (Unfortunately, a radio engineer does not get to decide how broadcast compression works.)
Regardless of credentials, it is the quality of a writer’s thoughts which matter. Attacking credentials is pure ad hominem.
He raises some good points.
There are many tin-eared audiophiles, more obsessed with equipment than interested in music. There are plenty of audiophiles, even here, who will not listen to a recording of music unless it sounds good - never mind if the music and performance are great.
There are also those who use equipment as a means to an end; to listen to and enjoy music as music.
Every enthusiast hobby has plenty of poseurs and those in it for the wrong reasons. There is nothing wrong with recognizing this.
I do not know anyone with an iPod loaded with music and who listens endlessly that does not truly enjoy music as music. These people are everywhere.
Sadly, I know and have met plenty of audiophiles who know much less about music than the iPod carrying music lover, but who can readily repeat the specs of every component they have ever owned.
That’s all true Elk. And there is an awful lot of snake oil out there and it can be very hard to distinguish the real from the bogus (to alrainbow’s point). But there are also plenty of audiophiles who love music as much as, or more than, their equipment. Hopefully that includes most of us. Ken’s screed on audiophiles does not recognize this as even being possible. Even the link to the audiophile article was the word “whackos”. I’ve read one or two of his prior audio pieces and, while he did make some good points, I found much to disagree with, including his “I’m right and they’re all deluded fools” tone. Dogmatism on both sides is best avoided.
Elk, everyone is entitled to an opinion and I certainly think you have one of the most honest and thought through ones on this site. I don’t have any significant issue with what you say so I won’t argue your points, mainly because you’d probably come out on top, but they way Mr Rockwell presented his opinion was way over the top. Just annoys the crap out of me when people like him take this sort of stance. None of us know it all, so leave at least a little room for compromise just in case you are wrong. I will admit I’m hesitant to tell people I’m an audiophile, mainly because others harbor similiar opinions to Mr Rockwell.
stevem2 said: But there are also plenty of audiophiles who love music as much as, or more than, their equipment. Hopefully that includes most of us. Ken's screed on audiophiles does not recognize this as even being possible.
pmotz said: . . . but they way Mr Rockwell presented his opinion was way over the top
Gentlemen, you are absolutely correct. He did paint with an overly broad brush. Rereading the essay, he does not allow for there to be an audiophile who honors the music first. This is wrong-headed on his part.
Sadly, as with many stereotypes, there is however more truth to his comments than we would like.
As an aside, the term "foodie" seems to have a similarly pejorative meaning - snobby, self-obsessed, etc. This is unfortunate as there are plenty of us who simply appreciate well-prepared food made of wonderful ingredients, from a grilled cheese sandwich to more exotic fare. We need a new term to describe us.
Agreed, although I think it may depend on who’s talking. My wife, who is a serious cook in her spare time, would describe herself as a “foodie” and she is anything but snobby or self obsessed about it. I guess the same is true of “audiophile.” I tend to describe myself to the uninitiated as a “stereo nut,” which seems to disarm people a bit (i.e., showing that I recognize my “illness” and don’t take myself that seriously; but I also avoid talking about how much I spend on things like power cords, unless I want to get a rise out of someone).
I say the same thing stereo nut . and I do not tell people how much I spend either, . but I will share to strangers on sites like this. I do not feel any of us have issues , its just a hobby that is expensive and safe. I use to races cars and bikes . expensive and very unsafe, so stereo stuff is better.
al
stevem2 said: My wife, who is a serious cook in her spare time, would describe herself as a "foodie" and she is anything but snobby or self obsessed about it.
Me, too. It was not until I heard a story on NPR did I learn many think of foodies as an obnoxious breed. Here I thought it just meant we like food.
alrainbow said: I use to races cars and bikes . expensive and very unsafe, so stereo stuff is better.
Stereos are much cheaper, as are the mods. And then there are the disposables (tires, rotors, brake pads, etc.)
Coincidentally I just bought my first motorcycle which is not a superbike, a Ducati 1098 S Streetfighter. It does have a superbike engine however. :)
Wow that is a nice bike. Enjoy it . I had a CUST that had one a few years ago great heritage bike. And that is a fast bike.
160 hp. Right ?
Al
Yippers, 160 HP - before the full Termignoni exhaust, balanced injectors, ported, etc. and the custom Doug Lofgren dyno tune.
It is still more sensible than my 1098 S Superbike Tricolore or a 1199 Panigale.
Before performance mods:
That is so much much nicer than the red and white ones. You are a wild man. Really nice bike . I love the sound of those engines they have a sound of there own.
alrainbow said: You are a wild man.
:) This is the most conservative machine I have ever owned.
Audio related:
You are correct; Ducatis do possess a unique sound, especially with an open dry clutch.
Back to the much more interesting topic of Redbook.