And Audiophiles Are Nuts?

[MylesBAstor]

Some beautiful axes here!

[JackD201]

I often ask myself if I would've become an audiophile if I had musical talent. The answer I often come up with is "probably not". Being a total musical scrub just makes me appreciate the talent, genius and discipline of writers and musicians that much more. If I could shred, I probably would have one or more of them axes!

[Garth]

don't worry your still nuts

[JackD201]

True. Certifiable.

A piece of history that could be played and might actually go up in value, maybe not so nuts. Now if only I actually could play and also happened to be Gates or Zuckerberg.............

[Bill Hart]

I've seen a similar list before, and neither includes the Les Paul owned by Peter Green that he sold to Gary Moore for 100 quid. Moore sold the guitar for big money before the 2008 crash- I think somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.75 million (dollars?). It was owned, allegedly, by an American collector who kept it in the UK- or so my memory tells me, and was asking over 2 million for a while. I think it sold recently to the Metallica guy- can't remember what he paid, but I'm sure it was considerable. It is beat up, one pick up is out of phase and it has a lot of history.

[Rust]

It's like comparing apples to watermelons. Guitars with provenance are unique, singular, and due to their owners are of historical significance. The Strat Hendrix played at Woodstock? Double down on all of the above.

One has to wonder if those instruments will hold their value in the future. They are significant to those who were rocking out at the time to those musicians were performing, but what about subsequent generations.

Of course there are instruments that are significant due to their creator and not who played them. Consider a Stradivarius. The Molitor Stradivarius was purchased for 3.6 million. The Lady Blunt Stradivarius went for 15.9 million. No Stradivarius in playable condition would go for less than 1.5 million. Even bows from known makers can fetch tens of thousands of dollars.

I don't see the valuation of any piece of audio gear increasing significantly over time. The majority of the very best would not even hold it's purchase price over a period of a few years. Yes, certain used equipment is sold for more than it's purchase price like old McIntosh 275s but adjusted for inflation not so much or not even in absolute value.

Still makes more sense to me than collecting watches.

[MylesBAstor]

I like my watches.

[JCOConnell]

I like watches too. About 10 years ago I caught watch fever for a couple of years. I don't buy anymore and just enjoy what I have which is a sizable collection of vintage mechanical and quartzes.

[MylesBAstor]

Same here too. I love my IWC and Panerai. And a couple of other nice watches. I still have a hankering though for a Breitling Navitimer from time to time though.

[MylesBAstor]

I often ask myself if I would've become an audiophile if I had musical talent. The answer I often come up with is "probably not". Being a total musical scrub just makes me appreciate the talent, genius and discipline of writers and musicians that much more. If I could shred, I probably would have one or more of them axes!

And maybe too! Interesting thought.

Albert talked about Andrew Litton who came to his listening nights, there's David Chesky (and his love for all things electrostatic or quads) and just the other night I was talking with Bob Grossman who's an audiophile and plays the bassoon with the Philadelphia Orchestra. I really wonder who many professional musicians are audiophiles? Maybe more than we think or know? (Not counting Szell who put his speakers behind the couch!)

[Rust]

I think some people hear the music in their heads and the system is not relevant, others prefer a good system as a plus.

[MylesBAstor]

I think some people hear the music in their heads and the system is not relevant, others prefer a good system as a plus.

Another thing to also consider is that all the musicians I knew/know listen to other performances of pieces they are rehearsing. So listening on a better than Bose system might also be an advantage.

[Rust]

Another thing to also consider is that all the musicians I knew/know listen to other performances of pieces they are rehearsing. So listening on a better than Bose system might also be an advantage.

Not always. Sometimes when trying to pick up a new piece of music, listening on too good a system didn't work as well as might be expected. Too often I'd be listening to the reproduction of the performance rather than concentrating on the music. A loss of focus so to speak. I suppose that varies from person to person, but as long as whatever I'm listening to is clear enough to pick up the music, it's good enough to learn with.

Now listening to a performance purely for enjoyment is an entirely different thing. A good system is required then.

[MylesBAstor]

Not always. Sometimes when trying to pick up a new piece of music, listening on too good a system didn't work as well as might be expected. Too often I'd be listening to the reproduction of the performance rather than concentrating on the music. A loss of focus so to speak. I suppose that varies from person to person, but as long as whatever I'm listening to is clear enough to pick up the music, it's good enough to learn with.

Now listening to a performance purely for enjoyment is an entirely different thing. A good system is required then.

Interesting. I know that my guitar teacher now insists on listening the song we are working on or if we are doing more of a music theory day on my audio system.

Other musicians that have been over also talk about being able to tell the make and model of the instrument being played. Come to think of it, this would make for a good separate thread.