... is just one of the chapters on Julian Musgrave's wonderful Audio Insight website. He takes an in-depth look at why we do high-end audio, which makes a refreshing change from virtually every other audio site that looks at how to do it.
« separation of why from how is a crucial element in the process for the following reason. Everything we do in high end audio must be judged against what we are trying to achieve. Thus how we do high end audio can only be validated against why we do high end audio.
This much seems to be obvious but we audiophiles muddy the waters by confusing why we do high end audio with how we do high end audio. Let me explain. The methodology of reading reviews, going to shows, auditioning and so on and so forth, even down to what sort of sound we want is all about how we do high end audio. It has little or nothing to say why we do high end audio apart from the mouthing of a string of demonstrably useless axioms. Virtually all of the discussion in high end audio is about how we do it. It is a discussion about method.
...
There is good reason for why we love doing how and why we avoid why. The how is actually more interesting than the why. If we are doing how we can focus outwards on equipment, shiny new boxes, gorgeous turntables, hard facts, measurements and specifications – all of which, being men, we are good at. These things are engaging, sensuous and seductive, as we all know. By contrast why means we must focus inwards on more difficult issues like our psychological landscape. We will have to do silly things like ask ourselves why we are audiophiles, what brought us here and what drives us. Our inner audiophile is not nearly as attractive as a new tonearm. One is a brilliantly designed and perfectly formed piece of precision engineering that delights the eye with its clean lines, its purposeful beauty and its promise of perfection. The other? It’s none of these things. Let’s be honest. Looking inwardly at ourselves does not reveal an especially pretty vista so we gloss over it. Pretend it doesn’t matter. We are not nearly as good at the why, so we avoid it.
The problem is that, while doing the how is fun, clearly in the long run it does not nourish and satisfy. Regrettably, if we want to achieve our goals in high end audio then we must do the why thing whether we like it or not. »
Treat yourself to a few hours of entertaining reading ; get in in touch with your inner audiophile and slay a few SAVs* along the way.
* (Strongly Argued Views)
Posted on: 21 April 2016 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
... but back to Mr Musgrave. His answer to the why is that we are on an artist's quest, as obsessive as the artist in finding and refining the aesthetic, which in the case of audiophile splits into three: The Visual aesthetic (appearance, scale and setting of the equipment*), the Cultural aesthetic (system architecture, ergonomics, brand loyalty) and the Sound aesthetic (the profile of the individual audiophile**).
Makes sense.
* Most popular thread : System Pics
** See « Early Audiophile Triggers » and « Deeply Embedded Conflicts »
Posted on: 21 April 2016 by Huge
... but back to Mr Musgrave. His answer to the why is that we are on an artist's quest, as obsessive as the artist in finding and refining the aesthetic, which in the case of audiophile splits into three: The Visual aesthetic (appearance, scale and setting of the equipment*), the Cultural aesthetic (system architecture, ergonomics, brand loyalty) and the Sound aesthetic (the profile of the individual audiophile**).
Makes sense.
* Most popular thread : System Pics
** See « Early Audiophile Triggers » and « Deeply Embedded Conflicts »
Oh dear! on the surface at least, that does seem to be a bit bleak.
Since Mr Musgrave specifically differentiates the terms sound and music (particularly noting that sound encompasses things such as noise and need have no artistic content), then specifying those options in that way, and excluding all others, apparently leaves none that centres around the artistic appreciation of the reproduced music (or other signal as appropriate).
Perhaps Signal aesthetic (since a signal must at least convey some information) or Musical aesthetic would be a better term than Sound aesthetic? Maybe one of these should be added to the list of possibilities in addition to Sound aesthetic? Alternatively, maybe a specific definition of the term Sound aesthetic is necessary to distinguish this from simple use of the word "sound"?
That is, unless the intent is to convey that, in his opinion, no-one is in pursuit of the Musical aesthetic, rather that we are all primarily pursuing specific technical characteristics which we select from one of three aspects of the equipment used, i.e. visual, cultural or sonic characteristics, with no reference to the music. In which case I disagree (but my system is at XS level and maybe doesn't qualify as High End Audio, in which case I may not be qualified to comment).
However I do agree with the principle of the "artist's quest" and the (usually) obsessive nature thereof.
Posted on: 30 April 2016 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Article 18 (anyone else made it this far?).
We must plan our systems completely anew, from scratch, using our new insights, guiding principles and the resultant methods to create a single coherent whole. The inexorable logic of this is that if you wish to create a truly cohesive work of art that fulfils all aesthetic objectives and that will satisfy you in all ways for a very long time, then you must sell every single piece of high end audio equipment you currently own. Every piece. You must be completely free of any ties of ownership, allegiance and existing prejudice in order to complete the task ahead. The chances of any of your current system fitting into this new vision is slight, and I would suggest, very likely to warp the process.
This does not bode well.
Posted on: 30 April 2016 by Adam Zielinski
Whilst what the author wrote may seem logical, I think it takes the whole concept in a bit of an orthodox way.
Money no object - probably a good idea, as this would give one a 'clean slate' approach.
Us mere mortals, who embraced the 'upgrade path' are most likekley 'stuck' with various bits and pieces from a system we currently enjoy.
In this context having a good dealer, who's 'seen it all, done it all' would appear to be of vital importance. Provided we can / are willing to accept our dealer's advice, we may avoid the painful advice from the 'Article 18' and gradually reach our audio shangri-la.
