Is it "golden ears", design knowledge, recording knowledge, experience setting up multiple systems of disparate technologies, acoustics knowledge, knowing what to listen for, understanding which measurements are important and which one's aren't? Others?
What separates the guys who really know something vs. guys who throw stuff together like bad chefs?
Bad chefs...lol? They would really have to be bad to screw up music. There is known and unknown in this hobby,therefore knowledge and experience are needed. The truth is it is a artful hobby.
Is it "golden ears", design knowledge, recording knowledge, experience setting up multiple systems of disparate technologies, acoustics knowledge, knowing what to listen for, understanding which measurements are important and which one's aren't? Others?
What separates the guys who really know something vs. guys who throw stuff together like bad chefs?
I think it is all of the above, plus keeping up with the latest and most newest important changes in the audio climate.
Someone's sig here says that the audiophile journey ends up @ the bricks and mortars audio store of the heavens. That pretty much defines my philosophy.
-----
"An audiophile is only done when they go to the great brick and mortar store in the sky"
Bad chefs...lol? They would really have to be bad to screw up music. There is known and unknown in this hobby,therefore knowledge and experience are needed. The truth is it is a artful hobby.
We have all enjoyed music playing on AM radio, I think. And we have also heard systems that didn't match our preferred taste, yet we intellectually respected as "good systems"...
Yes but if you want to be a food taster or wine connoisseur, you don't need to necessarily know how to cook well or make wine. You need sampling experience. A lot of fellow Indians who lived abroad kept claiming their food was the best and refused to try new food, especially sushi which was descriptively the opposite - non spicy, non fried curry. I did try Sainsbury and Tesco sushi initially and thought sushi was crap... Only after tasting further and trying different cuisine over a number of years through want of trying rather than to say my own cuisine is the best, does food taste develop.
Commercial churning makes everybody a bad chef. One of the talents of audio critics is to lightly tamp the graveyard soil over their previous raves to inculcate a new generation of products that somehow are always "best", but nonetheless go through a seemingly endless cycle of MkI, MkII, MkIII etc. "better".
My systems are currently to my taste and enjoyment, which is all that matters. It takes a while, but jumping off the OC disorder carousel while still maintaining an attitude of exploration seems to be a skill all by itself.
We have all enjoyed music playing on AM radio, I think. And we have also heard systems that didn't match our preferred taste, yet we intellectually respected as "good systems"...
I don't know Roger, remember Frank's tweaked out boombox where everything was hardwired and you could, in his own words, "capture the sound stage and imaging whether you were 2" inches away from the tweeter or 2 rooms away"? LOL.
I don't know Roger, remember Frank's tweaked out boombox where everything was hardwired and you could, in his own words, "capture the sound stage and imaging whether you were 2" inches away from the tweeter or 2 rooms away"? LOL.
Tom....that part of Frank's experience theory was a exception. To his credit some where a long the way he has heard very good systems. Some may be at different levels,but most of us know good sound when we hear it. As Mike says....it's in the tasting.
Is it "golden ears", design knowledge, recording knowledge, experience setting up multiple systems of disparate technologies, acoustics knowledge, knowing what to listen for, understanding which measurements are important and which one's aren't? Others?
Unattributed quote I heard years ago in a presentation during and audio measurement/modeling workshop:
"Experience is having made all the mistakes... Knowledge is having made them often enough to recognize a pattern."
In the audio world we have experts with many different specialties and particular skills. Some have more broad, system execution experience, some are hyper specialized. Thinking for a moment on the question, I'd say there are at least 4 critical aspects which make for an expert vs a hobbyist who knows his own system well or someone who's still experimenting on those he helps. Here's a quick stab at some important qualifications and differentiators:
Varied experience in the area of specialty. In most cases this requires both listening and some form of technical tinkering.
Research and technical knowledge allowing for understanding from observations made. While some may not have the deep, technical schooling in the specific topic, anyone who really knows a topic is well aware of past research, writings, and is always searching and looking for more information.
Familiarity with a method to quantify and describe attributes and characteristics of their area of specialty.
Execution and application of expertise through confirmation of results in a variety of different situations and under varying conditions. If your understanding doesn't hold water outside of one specific example and can't be translated, you are probably stuck on coincidence and not causality.
I think you have that right. The who has been in all the listening rooms with all the hi-files stereo systems of the planet shall be highly respected when expressing her opinion. ...Women have better hearing. :b
To be really good at anything requires skill AND experience (in sports this is through training and competition...in cooking it is making lots of dishes etc.). I have never met anyone at a very high level of anything (other than business and politics that is) that was experienced but lacking skill. Now, there are plenty of audiophiles out there with lots of experience (gear swapping as a hobby unto itself) but lacking the fundamental skills to know how to get a really good sound. They just cannot connect what they are hearing from a system and what they SHOULD be hearing and realizing what is missing or in excess and how to adjust a system to correct these deficiencies.
On the other hand, someone with a fundamentally good "ear" will not need a huge training set to zero in on a realistic sound because in their mind's ear they can tell when it is right, right away. Training only refines this and perhaps streamlines the process and they will rapidly proceed to a system that is the envy of a lot of other audiophiles. People with talent realize very early on that they can do things others cannot. My ex had phenomenal hearing and ability to process what she heard, which served her well as a professional violinist (already on Polish TV at age 5 as a phenom) She could hear instantly when things were off. There was 20 years of training in that hearing but the basic talent was obvious from the very beginning.
I will once again be a contrarian and say that I think most of the systems owned on this forum are no better than mediocre...just like the myriad of disappointing show demos I hear every year. Now, of course we are talking about a raised bar because for sure most are better than non-audiophile systems or ones that are composed of budget components. However, I am pretty certain that the majority of them are not getting anywhere close to the "breath of life" and in this respect are not very convincing. The egos here won't let that thought escape I am sure and everyone will be looking at his neighbor as the one who has the mediocre system (regardless of what was paid) but look in the mirror because most of you don't have the talent and try but fail to compensate with experience. Now, audio, unlike playing an instrument or cooking can benefit from experience if you know who to copy. Then you ride someone else's talent to a great system...not that you really hear it yourself...kind of like having a wine guru pick your cellar and you come off looking like a genius...
Of course who is to decide in the absence of objective criteria for judgement? I could tell you that I can hear better, in terms of comparison and telling when things sound more correct, but how would you be able to validate this claim? You can't and the person making the claim often comes off sounding like an arrogant prick. However, if a consensus is formed by many people using that person's knowledge and experience to better their own systems, then you can be pretty sure that this person is on to something. If you find that your advice goes largely unheeded then you perhaps need to check your premises.
