Audiophiles and their music preferences!

[Johnny Vinyl]

There are a few threads around that extol the virtues of really good 2-Channel Audio gear. And one of the questions I've always wanted to ask is what type of music do you listen to? It is varied? Or does it lend itself better to certain genres like Classical and Jazz?

From my own perspective with my poor man's interpretation of high-end audio, I tend to favour Classical, Jazz, Progressive Rock and Female recording artists like Ricky Lee Jones, Patricia Barber, Eva Cassidy and the list goes on.

I have also found that people with high-end audio gear tend to search out the more obscure, like stuff by Deodato, Kitaro and some of the great African performers like Salif Keita.

Are audiophiles more progressive in their search for content?

I'd love to hear some comments and opinions!

[naturephoto1]

I like a lot of Progressive Rock, some new age, and classical. Not that everything is as well recorded as it might be. High end equipment can only go so far in making poor recordings sound good. Poor recordings will just sound poor, but those stellar recordings can be something else.

As an example, though Yes is my favorite rock band, many of their releases are not nearly as well recorded as they could be. Then there are other recordings by other artists that I do not enjoy as well but they can be extremely well recorded including Allison Krauss, Jennifer Warnes, Diana Krall, Acoustic Alchemy (great recordings by and large), Kitaro......

Rich

[cravnsn]

I consider myself an audiophile, albeit on a budget. That said, I don’t believe in limiting myself to a certain type of music. Sure, if I was going to show off the virtues of my system, I would pick a well recorded & engineered acoustic recording, but I still want to listen to a wide variety of music, and enjoy it as best I can.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Originally Posted by naturephoto1

I like a lot of Progressive Rock, some new age, and classical. Not that everything is as well recorded as it might be. High end equipment can only go so far in making poor recordings sound good. Poor recordings will just sound poor, but those stellar recordings can be something else.

As an example, though Yes is my favorite rock band, many of their releases are not nearly as well recorded as they could be. Then there are other recordings by other artists that I do not enjoy as well but they can be extremely well recorded including Allison Krauss, Jennifer Warnes, Diana Krall, Acoustic Alchemy (great recordings by and large), Kitaro......

Rich

I enjoy both Acoustic Alchemy and Kitaro as well.

As far as Prog Rock is concerned, it is what I enjoy more than anything on a well-recorded transcription. If I may, let me turn you on to some Quebec based albums by Harmonium and Fiori-Seguin. They are recorded in French, but you won't care as the music is utterly sublime and very well recorded.

I personally favour Fiori-Seguin's album : Deux Cents Nuits A l'Heure.

Harmonium's l'Heptade and Si On Avait Besoin d'Une Cinquieme Saison are much more symphonic, but enjoyable in their own right.

I think you can get some snippets at www.progarchives.com

[Scooby Blu]

I'm an old metal head and rocker. I agree with the quality of the recording mentioned above. Rush is a great band to show case off a nice system. Also, Steely Dan and Alice in Chains, Jar of Flies is always a good time. Also the old boys in Pink Floyd know how to bring out the best of many a system around.

I went through a Jazz phase in my 20's and still have those disks laying around that I throw in from time to time.

I tell you what Ozzy and Black Sabbath sound amazing on a 4,000 two channel system !

[Clark Kent]

I had pretty traditional popular music tastes until I got a nice two channel setup. After a while listening on a revealing system it compels you to buy better recorded genres of music, though I still love my pop and rock music. I listen to a lot more female vocalists, classical music, and opera than I ever did before. It still is awesome hearing some classic Bob Dylan on a high end system.

[btf1980]

I've found that many "audiophiles", and I use that term loosely, listen to music that "audiophiles" are supposed to listen to. What do I mean by that? Well, invariably in many circles this means listening to boring, no pizzazz, jazz lounge singers that would get laughed at by most people who actually give a damn about the wide genre of jazz, but hey, it was recorded well!! Too many people listen to music because it was engineered excellently. That defeats the entire purpose of being a music lover.

[rded]

I'd like to be considered an "audiophile"... I listen to a lot of rock music- heavy metal, punk, glam, death metal and alternative. Unfortunately, there are only a handful of well-recorded/mixed/remastered albums and this just upsets me.

[jdc115]

Originally Posted by John72953

From my own perspective with my poor man's interpretation of high-end audio, I tend to favour Classical, Jazz, Progressive Rock and Female recording artists like Ricky Lee Jones, Patricia Barber, Eva Cassidy and the list goes on.

Funny you mention, I just put a new tube preamp in my system two days ago and I am sitting listening to Patricia Barber now, she is more amazing in person but best to catch her at a local club in Chicago then on tour.

But in general, I'll listen to a lot of jazz and various rock/progressive/acoustic music. Anything from Pink Floyd to Dead Can Dance or Neil Young. I have a lot of classical CDs but do not pull them out that often these days, I find I prefer to go see a live performance instead.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by naturephoto1

As an example, though Yes is my favorite rock band, many of their releases are not nearly as well recorded as they could be. Then there are other recordings by other artists that I do not enjoy as well but they can be extremely well recorded including Allison Krauss, Jennifer Warnes, Diana Krall, Acoustic Alchemy (great recordings by and large), Kitaro......

Rich

Love Allison Krauss ......

[Big Daddy]

Originally Posted by btf1980

I've found that many "audiophiles", and I use that term loosely, listen to music that "audiophiles" are supposed to listen to. What do I mean by that? Well, invariably in many circles this means listening to boring, no pizzazz, jazz lounge singers that would get laughed at by most people who actually give a damn about the wide genre of jazz, but hey, it was recorded well!! Too many people listen to music because it was engineered excellently. That defeats the entire purpose of being a music lover.

I listen to Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on SACD at least once a week. I also own the regular CD, LP, and cassette of this masterpiece. I suppose that means the mainstream jazz lovers laugh at me or maybe this album qualifies as being part of the "wide genre of jazz" (whatever that means) because there are only lounge players and no lounge singers in it. Who cares what others think?

I also listen to Dark Side of the Moon, Tommy by Who, Rachmaninov Piano Concerto #2, Beethoven's Symphony No #9, Kitaro, Azuma, Linda Ronstsadt & The Nelson Riddle Orchestra, Dead Can Dance, Beatles, Rolling Stones, and many more on SACD, CD, DVD-A, and LP. My only regret is that I sold most of my LP's a few years ago when I had to move.

[dimebag]

Before I first got into the hobby about 10 yrs ago all I listened to was heavy, loud, fast music but as soon as I spent a decent amount of money on a starter system my musical tastes changed dramatically. I tend to listen to music that suits the mood I'm in, anything from lite to heavy.

[btf1980]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy

I listen to Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on SACD at least once a week. I also own the regular CD, LP, and cassette of this masterpiece. I suppose that means the mainstream jazz lovers laugh at me or maybe this album qualifies as being part of the "wide genre of jazz" (whatever that means) because there are only lounge players and no lounge singers in it. Who cares what others think?

I think you misunderstood my post entirely.

[JJ]

::Is quite terrified to post in this thread::

[ixlegitballinxl]

i prefer music with alot of instruments....for mellow modes i prefer music from sinatra and some good soothing reggae music.

[lobo81865]

I am not an audiophile, and I listen to Boston, Journey, Bob Seger, The Eagles, Foreigner, Meatloaf, John Denver, Jim Croce, Gordon Lightfoot, etc., but most of all Dan Fogelberg.

[JasonR]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Love Allison Krauss ......

Raising Sand is awesome!

[richteer]

Great question!

I like most genres of music, though I have a preference for pop/rock. I have (literally) something from A to Z in the genre, from Abba to Dire Straits to Jean-Michel Jarre to Pink Floyd to Simon and Garfunkel to Bruce Springsteen to ZZ Top. I also like "popular" classical--Beethoven's symphonies are a fave, as is the Four Seasons and The Planets.

I used to say that liked pretty much anything except jazz, but now that I've been exposed to of Vince Guaraldi's work I'm cautiously exploring that genre too.

Of course, one of the problems with owning a high resolution system is that it exposes poor recordings for what they are. But the upside is just as good, if not better: great recordings sound fantastic!

[krazeyeyez]

although i wouldn't consider myself an audiophile, i do care about the quality of my music. i will not however limit myself to only high quality recordings, some of my favorite music is bootlegged live recordings with a very very low quality, marley, sublime, greatful dead, old punk bands etc.... i won't pass on these rare recordings or songs just because they wern't done in a studio and have AWFUL quality lol. this is why i consider myself a music lover, and not an audiophile, but obviously i would love to hear some of my favorites in higher quality.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

although i wouldn't consider myself an audiophile, i do care about the quality of my music. i will not however limit myself to only high quality recordings, some of my favorite music is bootlegged live recordings with a very very low quality, marley, sublime, greatful dead, old punk bands etc.... i won't pass on these rare recordings or songs just because they wern't done in a studio and have AWFUL quality lol. this is why i consider myself a music lover, and not an audiophile, but obviously i would love to hear some of my favorites in higher quality.

Well said. However I don't know if I could bring myself to purchasing something that sounds awful! LOL! But I get what you are saying!

Like you, and I suppose many others, I consider myself to be a music fan first and foremost. Just like I wouldn't spend a dime on an awful record, I wouldn't spend a dime on an excellent recording containing music that doesn't move me. Admitedly, I've made that mistake once or twice.