View Full Version : Are we, as a breed of 'Audiophiles' dying out?
I found this article on the Headphonesty site thoughtful: https://www.headphonesty.com/2026/02/legacy-hifi-brands-dying-new-brands-winning/, and made me wonder if 'audiophiles' (as a collective noun for those music lovers who spend time researching and a not-insignificant amount of money in pursuing their love of well-reproduced music) are dying out.
The main thrust of their thesis is that equipment which five to ten years ago would have cost many thousands of pounds to buy, now thanks to the likes of manufacturers such as Schiit, SMSL, and others now achieve the same, or close to the same quality for a much lower price. To express it as a sound bite: "Close enough is good enough". Why pay thousands, or tens of thousands when you can achieve 90% or more of the performance for a tenth of the price? And to think that they are exaggerating, speaker systems costing up to £500,000 or more, and audio electronics costing £20,000 and more are now being advertised and reviewed.
A secondary consideration is the majority of current music lovers now eschew hard copies of the music source, preferring to stream instead; without realising the source quality is dependent on the whim of the server and can change with time.
Also, the modern trend is for small independent audio manufacturers to be bought out by larger conglomerates (for example: Quad, Leak, Mission are now under the umbrella of a Taiwanese company, the International Audio Group; Naim and Focal have merged and are owned by the Vervent Audio group; McIntosh is now owned by Bose (Oh - the irony!) and Madrigal in the US, owner several of former high quality marques is now part of the Harman Group, and is a subsidiary of Samsung electronics, to the great detriment of the reputation of the former individual brands. Having manufacturers now owned by an overall group will obviously affect dealers and the impartiality of their advice (witness the Linn/Naim 'axis' fiasco of the '70s in the UK).
For my part, I'm too old now to be constantly upgrading, and if I wasn't, I doubt if I would be willing to spend the prices asked. I don't even read the hi-fi magazines - all the reviews are IMO gushing and hardly impartial. The demonstration of current audio gear at the audio shows again is rarely impartial, and audition at dealers is sometimes difficult because these days dealers are often reluctant to spend time and effort demonstrating equipment, only to have an interested customer go out and buy on-line for a cheaper price. I'm lucky in that I have bought gear from good, conscientious dealers, and the manufacturers themselves have always offered excellent after-sales service. My gear long ceased to be 'state of the art', but it still sounds good to me, as it does to others (sometimes musicians themselves) who have visited my place.
What are your thoughts - are you one of a dying breed?
I think the premise of the article is wrong
In practical terms, “high-end” here often means the measurable noise and distortion are low enough to fall beneath what most listeners can reliably hear in normal use. Once gear clears that threshold, the remaining differences tend to shift away from raw fidelity and toward things like features, software, industrial design, service, and brand.
It's not that there are suddenly products on the market that compete with the high end on noise and distortion, they have always existed at least based on the articles qualification of what high end is.
Also what none of these 'industry is dying' articles don't take into account is people don't remain static in age, wealth or circumstances. Someone age 30 now buys cheap equipment but when he's 55 he might have the money to indulge in high end, get the things he always wanted.
The reason high end customers are old is because they are mostly the only ones who can afford it. New wealthy old people arrive all the time to replace those dying at the other end.
Pigmy Pony
15-02-2026, 22:07
I think the premise of the article is wrong
In practical terms, “high-end” here often means the measurable noise and distortion are low enough to fall beneath what most listeners can reliably hear in normal use. Once gear clears that threshold, the remaining differences tend to shift away from raw fidelity and toward things like features, software, industrial design, service, and brand.
It's not that there are suddenly products on the market that compete with the high end on noise and distortion, they have always existed at least based on the articles qualification of what high end is.
Also what none of these 'industry is dying' articles don't take into account is people don't remain static in age, wealth or circumstances. Someone age 30 now buys cheap equipment but when he's 55 he might have the money to indulge in high end, get the things he always wanted.
The reason high end customers are old is because they are mostly the only ones who can afford it. New wealthy old people arrive all the time to replace those dying at the other end.
I agree with this - I know I'm generalising here, but by and large older folk (say 50 and above), having paid off their mortgage, kids grown up, now find themselves able to afford 'hobby' cars, motorcycles, mobile homes, travel to more exotic locations, and yes, high-end audio and home entertainment.
If there was no longer demand for 'high end' kit, the manufacturers wouldn't be throwing money at making the stuff, and there's no shortage of new products at every price point hitting the shelves. And as quickly as the old audiophiles die off, there are replacements at the start of that demographic stepping up. Well that is what I think (hope) is happening.
I agree with this - I know I'm generalising here, but by and large older folk (say 50 and above), having paid off their mortgage, kids grown up, now find themselves able to afford 'hobby' cars, motorcycles, mobile homes, travel to more exotic locations, and yes, high-end audio and home entertainment.
If there was no longer demand for 'high end' kit, the manufacturers wouldn't be throwing money at making the stuff, and there's no shortage of new products at every price point hitting the shelves. And as quickly as the old audiophiles die off, there are replacements at the start of that demographic stepping up. Well that is what I think (hope) is happening.
It's like saying caravanning is dying out because you go to a caravan site and it's mostly old people.
I went on caravan holiday in Wales in 1979 and it was mostly old people on the site, I bet if I went back now it still is - but it's not the same old people.
There's brands losing money of course but the problem there is they rested on their laurels too long. Mediocre products at high prices and your youngsters don't respect the brand like our generation so they're fine to buy the new brands instead.
A lot of the replies to the Headphonesty article suggest otherwise. It's not just that the legacy brands are struggling, it's the concept of 'high end audio' that is changing and who is satisfying that demand.
We all know of colleagues and friends of a certain age who now find themselves able to indulge in purchases they couldn't have afforded in their youth - buying a sports car which they keep for a year or two, then sell having satisfied their dream. I don't know of any who have replaced their Curry's rack system for a high end separates system.
In Chelmsford, we have two retailers of quality audio gear, they are also purveyors of quality TV systems. Bang & Olufsen is one of the retailers, so obviously they only offer their own products.
Anecdotes aren't evidence though. Someone is buying it and it's probably not people in their twenties with children and a mortgage.
If the companies selling it are loss making then either not enough people are buying or their margins are too low (the latter seems unlikely) or the market is overcrowded with vendors and the pie isn't big enough to go round.
No-one ever thinks about the BRIC countries which are now a market for luxury goods, which they weren't in the past.
Pigmy Pony
16-02-2026, 09:11
FWIW, my anecdotal 'evidence' is that when visiting the NW Audio Shows over the past ten years (apart from the '20/21 Covid cancellations), I can't say I've noticed any drop in visitor numbers there.
Ofc the demographic stays pretty much the same, but so what? Some could say that as kids grow into their 20s and their prefrontal cortex develops, they move away from TikTok and similar moronic persuits. This doesn't mean the end for TikTok, as there is a steady supply of new morons to replace them.
FWIW, my anecdotal 'evidence' is that when visiting the NW Audio Shows over the past ten years (apart from the '20/21 Covid cancellations), I can't say I've noticed any drop in visitor numbers there.
I been to all of them except one, if anything it's got busier over the ten years it's been running.
Pete The Cat
17-02-2026, 10:08
The article focuses on a squeezed middle segment.
It uses anecdotal examples of specific brands to make its point rather than citing overall market data such as units sold, although perhaps such data isn't readily available. That said, I'm inclined to agree with it using anecdotal examples of my own.
The sheer range of competing leisure interests nowadays must surely have eaten into the share of household wallet available for enthusiast audio compared with, say, 1980. Some folks are holidaying all over the world and often more than once a year. Most homes seem to have multiple phone and entertainment subscriptions.
Not only is there a range of competing interests but we see above inflation increases in many of these: a 'gig' ticket can cost you £hundreds; football fandom involves membership, replica kit etc and not just tickets; cars - in 1980 the Ford Cortina range started at £3,500, today's Ford Kuga starts at £30k. I don't see attendance levels at hi-fi shows as persuasive of sales volumes - like motor shows, folks love to drool over a Bugatti but they drive home in a Ford.
Home furnishing these days is relatively minimalist. Even blokes would rather toy with an app that can set the burglar alarm, switch on the immersion heater and control a Sonos 'thing' playing Spotify than fall out with their partner over the positioning of separate boxes and cables.
So I'd take some persuading that the audio enthusiast pool, which traditionally bought what the article sees as the middle segment, is being replenished at the same rate as it's reducing. But reducing need not mean ending, just a market readjustment. Fewer of us just means fewer of us, certainly not the end.
It's great that folks can get 'good enough' sound for less. I've never regarded audiophilia as being defined by how much you spend. Members of sites such as Head-Fi are seriously into sound quality - their reviews of headphones are as prosaic as anything by Jimmy Hughes. It's just that they prefer laptop, DAC and cans to crawling around the floor changing cables.
Something that affects both supply and demand in this debate is product longevity. A lot of the middle segment products are well-made and don't have multiple additional features that can go wrong; they can be serviced if not by the original manufacturer then by a specialist or enthusiast. Unlike a car, which you'll have to let go after the engine has reached X miles, you can live with your current amplifier (make that your current dumping amplifier :lol:) for decades.
An interesting discussion and just my tuppenceworth.
Ali Tait
17-02-2026, 12:15
I think a lot of the people buying very high priced kit are not necessarily audiophiles and are just buying audio jewellery. They probably don't look at or post on forums either.
I think a lot of the people buying very high priced kit are not necessarily audiophiles and are just buying audio jewellery. They probably don't look at or post on forums either.
I think there's non-audiophiles like that at all price levels. Lots of civilians with 'proper' separates systems, one of my brothers for example. Never been on an audio forum in his life. Forums are just a snapshot, really.
I'd guess the vast majority of people buying the crazy money kit are in the middle or far east, a lot of them probably don't speak English.
I'd say once you get past £10K per component it's no longer about sound quality although they might still pretend or believe it is. That realm is a whole different 'hobby' from what we do IMO.
Ali Tait
17-02-2026, 14:44
Aye, only the mere mortals are regulars here. :-)
Pigmy Pony
17-02-2026, 15:03
Aye, only the mere mortals are regulars here. :-)
Mere mortals? Pah! My superpower has always been spending more than I should on stuff that could be better... though my Kryptonite (state pension) has diminished my powers somewhat.
Ali Tait
17-02-2026, 16:21
LOL, I think a lot of us are guilty of that!
Wakefield Turntables
17-02-2026, 20:01
Are we, as a breed of 'Audiophiles' dying out? (https://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?79104-Are-we-as-a-breed-of-Audiophiles-dying-out)
We are all "dying out", it's called getting older!
ianlenco
24-02-2026, 15:16
For Christmas my children (3 of them with their own families) wanted to know what to buy me. With no bright ideas I asked for a 6 month subscription to HiFi Choice. I've had 3 issues so far and I'm totally flabbergasted at the price of some of the stuff. OK, I've bought a fair amount of hifi over the years, and though I still love my vinyl I have got into streaming. A while back I owned an Auralic Altair which I really enjoyed but ended up having to sell it for spares when it packed in and Auralic told me they no longer supported my machine! So nearly £1800 for a fairly high end machine down the drain I replaced it with a Wiim Ultra for around £300. It sounded just as good. My point is I don't think you have to spend a fortune on high end gear to get a sound you can really enjoy.
Add to that the cost of "vintage" hifi these days also makes me grumpy. I also go to the occasional hifi show but are mostly disappointed with what I hear especially form so called high end dealers. I could afford some of this gear but value as well as quality steers me a way from it.
Signed, grumpy old man :doh:
..........
A while back I owned an Auralic Altair which I really enjoyed but ended up having to sell it for spares when it packed in and Auralic told me they no longer supported my machine! So nearly £1800 for a fairly high end machine down the drain I replaced it with a Wiim Ultra for around £300. It sounded just as good. My point is I don't think you have to spend a fortune on high end gear to get a sound you can really enjoy.
Add to that the cost of "vintage" hifi these days also makes me grumpy. I also go to the occasional hifi show but are mostly disappointed with what I hear especially form so called high end dealers.
That was the central message of the Headphonesty article I cited.
If you want to be shocked by the price of current 'high end' audio gear you need only to look at Hi Fi+ magazine. Agree with you re. audio shows, and the lamentable demonstration of gear by "high end dealers". It is one of the reasons why I no longer attend such shows.
I think about 20 years since prices went ballistic.
I was looking through a 1990 copy of 'Hi-Fi Review' the other day. There's a review of the KEF 105/3 and they state 'At £1800 a pair the 105/3 is a true high end product.'
That's maybe £4K in today's money. And today that won't even get you much beyond the middle speaker in anyone's range let alone a 'High End' speaker which could cost £700K. In some ranges it will just about get you the small two-way at the bottom (the dedicated stands will be an extra grand).
I think sometime around the turn of the century someone decided they could move hi-fi into Veblen goods territory and then a lot of manufacturers followed suit so that's why we now routinely have amps, streamers, DACs costing well into five figures when even in these days of ballooning costs there's really no need for those devices to cost so much.
I agree - the Swiss company Goldmund achieved Veblen status about 10 years ago. In my opinion the new owners of SME are aiming for the same: witness their refusal to separately sell the arms, and of the absurd price of their newly manufactured Garrard 301 turntable system.
The trouble is, no matter how good a new product is from a Veblen-status company, it can never be sold for a realistic price without destroying that company's status. The Swiss watchmaker Rolex has to sell their watches for twice the price or more than that charged by other equally good manufacturers, because that is what potential purchasers expect and are prepared to pay for a status symbol.
I agree - the Swiss company Goldmund achieved Veblen status about 10 years ago. In my opinion the new owners of SME are aiming for the same: witness their refusal to separately sell the arms, and of the absurd price of their newly manufactured Garrard 301 turntable system.
The trouble is, no matter how good a new product is from a Veblen-status company, it can never be sold for a realistic price without destroying that company's status. The Swiss watchmaker Rolex has to sell their watches for twice the price or more than that charged by other equally good manufacturers, because that is what potential purchasers expect and are prepared to pay for a status symbol.
The difference is that a Rolex or other very expensive watch is something everyone accepts is a status symbol. A hi-fi not so much, maybe it was for a few years from mid 70s to mid 80s but now?
But that is exactly what Veblen status products are - they are status symbols, regardless of whether they are watches, designer goods, luxury cars, or hi-fi. They are bought to display the owner's wealth, are expensive and inaccessible to those who cannot afford them.
The paradox is that with Veblen status items, if the price asked rises so too does the exclusivity and desirability, and hence the demand by those interested in using them as status symbols.
I have to admit that only audio cognoscenti would recognise the worth of something as mundane as a piece of electronics - but a turntable, especially some of the high-end, and hence expensive, items could look very impressive to some.
I've been trying to think of any camera manufacturers who might claim to have Veblen status. The only names that come to mind are Leica (for their history and quality) and Alpa (for their exclusivity and quality).
Pigmy Pony
25-02-2026, 07:27
If my kit had been bought to be a 'status symbol' it would fail miserably - apart from a few friends and family, the only visitors we've had in the last 6 months were a gas engineer doing our annual boiler check and two Jehovah's Witnesses (who to be fair did comment on my set up). Oh and a monthly visit from a Polish chiropodist, and she wouldn't notice if I'd added flashing disco lights.
It's more likely they would be thinking "silly sod, that kind of money would buy me ten years of Benidorm holidays", but like the ladies who go for cosmetic surgery, 'I'm doing it for me, not anyone else'.
Different with cars, watches, designer goods, they are out there in the wider world impressing much larger numbers.
That is the point - none of us have bought our audio systems to be a status symbol. We have bought them to allow us to best enjoy music which is one of our pleasures. We may have spent a lot of money to achieve that situation, but we haven't done it solely to impress our friends, or anyone else who may visit our homes.
I still maintain that there are some very wealthy people out there who will buy an impressive and showy audio system, which may be "state of the art" and therefore expensive, simply as a status symbol. It is there to display the owner's wealth, not his interest in music. They are not audiophiles - unless that is they have a large music collection.
It is for those that Veblen goods are aimed.
I still maintain that there are some very wealthy people out there who will buy an impressive and showy audio system, which may be "state of the art" and therefore expensive, simply as a status symbol. It is there to display the owner's wealth, not his interest in music. They are not audiophiles - unless that is they have a large music collection.
.
I don't think I've ever encountered that, at least not overtly, but people say they have. I suppose it can confer some status if your social group are into hi-fi.
Size of the record collection is no longer a gauge of anything, anyone can have millions of records just by paying a £9.99 a month subscription.
In any case that 'size of the music collection' thing was always just another form of snobbery. Someone can love music but simply not afford to buy lots of records. Maybe they just have the radio, it's still listening to music.
Can you claim to be an audiophile if you just listen to the radio? I think the term audiophile means more than a music lover. What about those that only attend concerts and do not listen to anything at home. Admittedly they are a rara avis but they may exist.
I wouldn't rely on streaming as my software source. The quality is in the hands of the streaming provider and can change at any time.
Yes I agree that the 'size of the music collection' should not be a criterion for an audiophile, but when the cost of the reproducing system is tens of times the cost of the software collection, something is amiss.
Lawrence001
25-02-2026, 17:15
If my kit had been bought to be a 'status symbol' it would fail miserably - apart from a few friends and family, the only visitors we've had in the last 6 months were a gas engineer doing our annual boiler check and two Jehovah's Witnesses (who to be fair did comment on my set up). Oh and a monthly visit from a Polish chiropodist, and she wouldn't notice if I'd added flashing disco lights.
It's more likely they would be thinking "silly sod, that kind of money would buy me ten years of Benidorm holidays", but like the ladies who go for cosmetic surgery, 'I'm doing it for me, not anyone else'.
Different with cars, watches, designer goods, they are out there in the wider world impressing much larger numbers.
You actually invite the Jehovah's Witnesses in? Is that so you've got someone to show your hifi off to?
Yes I agree that the 'size of the music collection' should not be a criterion for an audiophile, but when the cost of the reproducing system is tens of times the cost of the software collection, something is amiss.
If they bought the system after the age of streaming began they may not own any 'software' at all so the cost ratio of system to music collection would be infinite, but they still might have a very high quality system and spend 10 hours a day listening to it. Not an audiophile?
Pigmy Pony
25-02-2026, 17:43
You actually invite the Jehovah's Witnesses in? Is that so you've got someone to show your hifi off to?
No, I had Homes under the Hammer on the telly at the time :D That's enough to ensure any visits are brief.
Really, it was a cold morning, and I couldn't imagine my neighbours being big on hospitality, so it was an act of kindness. Plus, I find it hard to say no to anyone - if I was a woman I'd probably have thirty kids by now :doh:
Pigmy Pony
25-02-2026, 17:48
I don't think I've ever encountered that, at least not overtly, but people say they have. I suppose it can confer some status if your social group are into hi-fi.
Size of the record collection is no longer a gauge of anything, anyone can have millions of records just by paying a £9.99 a month subscription.
In any case that 'size of the music collection' thing was always just another form of snobbery. Someone can love music but simply not afford to buy lots of records. Maybe they just have the radio, it's still listening to music.
The only person who has visited my house ever, with an interest in hifi and music is Firebottle and you - I bet that makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside :)
Pigmy Pony
25-02-2026, 17:52
There are people who choose hifi that makes their music sound good, then there's those who buy music that makes their hifi sound good. I suspect owners of 'status' kit are in the latter group.
The difference is that a Rolex or other very expensive watch is something everyone accepts is a status symbol. A hi-fi not so much, maybe it was for a few years from mid 70s to mid 80s but now?
Do they listen to their hifi music on their Rolex?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
hornucopia
26-02-2026, 11:02
As I turn the volume down…..my partner is not keen on music ‘all the time’’…..
I still have enough gear to have a system in each room, plus …thanks Ali….my iPod/idecco/Ether2 headphone set-up for bedtime listening.
But hearing is declining……test next week…….
Still, I’ve got to 79. And still got the Hafler kit I bought in 1970!
Pete The Cat
26-02-2026, 12:08
Can you claim to be an audiophile if you just listen to the radio? I think the term audiophile means more than a music lover. What about those that only attend concerts and do not listen to anything at home. Admittedly they are a rara avis but they may exist.
I wouldn't rely on streaming as my software source. The quality is in the hands of the streaming provider and can change at any time.
Yes I agree that the 'size of the music collection' should not be a criterion for an audiophile, but when the cost of the reproducing system is tens of times the cost of the software collection, something is amiss.
1. Agree. Audiophilia surely involves an interest in optimising sound reproduction and the equipment required to do this. The motivation for the latter is the former and not, for example, to demonstrate one's wealth.
2. Me neither. Additionally, ability to choose preferred version/mastering; ability to hear releases not on the streaming network for whatever reason; and risk of fait accompli price increase.
3. Yup.
Ali Tait
26-02-2026, 16:00
As I turn the volume down…..my partner is not keen on music ‘all the time’’…..
I still have enough gear to have a system in each room, plus …thanks Ali….my iPod/idecco/Ether2 headphone set-up for bedtime listening.
But hearing is declining……test next week…….
Still, I’ve got to 79. And still got the Hafler kit I bought in 1970!
Good 'phones those, glad you're still enjoying them. :-)
If they bought the system after the age of streaming began they may not own any 'software' at all so the cost ratio of system to music collection would be infinite, but they still might have a very high quality system and spend 10 hours a day listening to it. Not an audiophile?
If they disposed of their 'software', then that was their decision, but it is not something I would have done. Relying on streaming services does not guarantee you quality reproduction. These services will tailor the software to suit the customer, which increasingly are those who listen via smartphones/earbuds.
The cost ratio would only be infinite if the streaming service was free, which it is if you are willing to put up with invasive advertising or a limit to how many times you can skip tracks. If you are willing to pay an, albeit small, fee you are still not guaranteed the highest quality of reproduction.
If they disposed of their 'software', then that was their decision, but it is not something I would have done. Relying on streaming services does not guarantee you quality reproduction. These services will tailor the software to suit the customer, which increasingly are those who listen via smartphones/earbuds.
The cost ratio would only be infinite if the streaming service was free, which it is if you are willing to put up with invasive advertising or a limit to how many times you can skip tracks. If you are willing to pay an, albeit small, fee you are still not guaranteed the highest quality of reproduction.
Well you don't have to tell me, extent of my streaming is to check out stuff on Youtube. CD only in the main system, the only way to guarantee you have the best master and so the best sound.
But streaming has been going more than 15 years so there'll be a lot of people now with expensive systems that have never bought any physical media.
Physical media is only about 11 percent of music revenue now.
I think CD will have a comeback, albeit modest, sales of them are slowly rising as more people cotton on.
There are people who choose hifi that makes their music sound good, then there's those who buy music that makes their hifi sound good. I suspect owners of 'status' kit are in the latter group.
Possibly, but they would be a small group and certainly not likely to be a member of any audio forum (least of all AoS !).
However there are some people who I suspect do choose the music to make the equipment sound good. They are manufacturers demonstrating their audio wares at audio shows. One of the reasons why I have stopped attending the shows.
Pigmy Pony
27-02-2026, 12:26
Possibly, but they would be a small group and certainly not likely to be a member of any audio forum (least of all AoS !).
However there are some people who I suspect do choose the music to make the equipment sound good. They are manufacturers demonstrating their audio wares at audio shows. One of the reasons why I have stopped attending the shows.
Yeah that is one of Macca's pet peaves, Manufacturers' demonstrators using simple sounds (like two sticks knocked together) that no one's ever heard of, making direct comparisons all but impossible. You see it all the time at shows, and we tend to dismiss them as worthless dems.
Just picking up on the subject of streaming quality. The inference that sample/bit rate will reduce at the supplier's will is illogical in my opinion - Spotify have (finally) responded to subscriber pressure and moved to "lossless" (CD quality) - but Tidal and Qobuz both offer "hi-res" as one of their USP's - so I doubt they will ever go backwards - particularly now that very high speed broadband is available almost everywhere for a reasonable cost. For me, 15 years ago I was spending at least £150 a month on CDs and to a lesser extent vinyl - I spend £40 odd a month on a family Spotify subscription and Tidal - the latter being my preferred choice for "proper" listening. Currently playing an album on Tidal that is 24bit, 192Khz - and there is no other way to listen to it at that quality. I do still buy CDs for stuff I can't stream (then rip and stream them) and some vinyl - in both cases especially to support artists I am a big fan of, but overall I have saved a lot of money not buying CDs "unheard" and that only ever get one or two plays.
Digressing from the original point, somewhat - but in general I do agree that we are "dying out" - my daughter had a system setup in her room of some of my spare kit, but hardly used it, and is happy to listen to her music via headphones, or bluetooth speakers. Me personally I have moved towards powered speakers in most rooms now, rather than a rack of separates, and the Triangle "All In One" speaker "system" is among some of the best sound I have enjoyed at home - I personally see this as the area where hi-fi will continue to evolve, combined with network streaming, with Vinyl (and now CD) becoming more of a niche interest - but for the youngsters, it's not really about the sound quality in my opinion but more about the visceral experience of owning and handling the medium.
Currently playing an album on Tidal that is 24bit, 192Khz - and there is no other way to listen to it at that quality.
.
The use of 'quality' here is a bit of a misnomer since the 'quality' would be identical if it were on CD. That is, for anyone unable to hear frequencies above 22Khz.
Only a handful of all recordings ever made have a dynamic range higher than 16 bits and you'd need a very quiet environment and a speaker system capable of very high SPL at very low distortion in order to reap the benefit, such as it is.
I certainly would not be paying extra for that benefit. What actually matters for quality is the mastering and that is where streaming has issues.
Pete The Cat
27-02-2026, 16:48
Over the last ten years I've become more and more convinced of the importance of good mastering, and hence I check out the specific release version of an album that I want to play where this is an option.
Streaming usually only seems to offer one version of each album and sometimes it isn't clear which one. Of course, a CD may be poorly mastered or a CD and a stream may share the same mastering file, but at least with albums that have been around for years you can shop around for the best CD mastering available.
If this seems to take things too far, then I'd respond that it's just as relevant as how some folks are passionate about cable A v cable B and in fact everything else about us audiophiles. For example the 2011 Wish You Were Here is obviously better than the 2016/2025.
Just picking up on the subject of streaming quality. The inference that sample/bit rate will reduce at the supplier's will is illogical in my opinion - Spotify have (finally) responded to subscriber pressure and moved to "lossless" (CD quality) - but Tidal and Qobuz both offer "hi-res" as one of their USP's - so I doubt they will ever go backwards - particularly now that very high speed broadband is available almost everywhere for a reasonable cost. For me, 15 years ago I was spending at least £150 a month on CDs and to a lesser extent vinyl - I spend £40 odd a month on a family Spotify subscription and Tidal - the latter being my preferred choice for "proper" listening. Currently playing an album on Tidal that is 24bit, 192Khz - and there is no other way to listen to it at that quality. I do still buy CDs for stuff I can't stream (then rip and stream them) and some vinyl - in both cases especially to support artists I am a big fan of, but overall I have saved a lot of money not buying CDs "unheard" and that only ever get one or two plays.
My comments were made after a cursory research on the Web, including AI summary. Clearly it needs to updated, but even if the quality of reproduction has been improved, the actual source material used by the servers could be compressed. Even remastered CDs are compressed compared to earlier versions.
What actually matters for quality is the mastering and that is where streaming has issues.
+ 1
+ 1Streaming has no issues with mastering.
It just streams whatever has been mastered.
Either goodly, or badly.
Absolutely, I agree with you 100% Justin - I think you misinterpreted what I was agreeing to with Martin, it's what that source material is they are streaming and as you rightly say, that can be either good or bad.
The problem can be it's sometimes not what they claim it to be.
Streaming has no issues with mastering.
It just streams whatever has been mastered.
Either goodly, or badly.
I was referring to there sometimes being a lack of choice of masterings on streaming services. Sometimes there is only one and it's not the best one.
Yup, I understood what you meant Martin - I think Justin took it too literally.
Streaming services do seem to be improving, I'm using Qobuz at the moment having tried Tidal and Spotify for extended periods. I still prefer to stream my own ripped FLAC files from a music server though, it's also my music bought and paid for and not going to disappear.
I use streaming for discovery more than anything else.
I use streaming for discovery more than anything else.
I use Youtube for that, it usually has what I'm wanting to check out.
Enossification
24-04-2026, 12:30
Yeah, I think we may well be. The near obsessive need for our music to sound a certain way is I think dead and ready to be buried. Why may well be the next big question. I think that humanity has given up. I think that most people these days are stricken with apathy. I certainly hope I am wrong.
But then this year's 'High End' Axpona show outside Chicago had a record attendance, up 15 percent on last year with a '50 percent increase in Gen Z passes'.
More than 750 brands on show, from more than 50 different countries.
https://audioxpress.com/news/axpona-2026-delivers-record-attendance-exhibitors-and-listening-rooms
Doesn't seem like an interest that's at risk of dying.
Depends on what you define an Audiophile as?
I'm with Martin here, I think for people who enjoy music it's not going to change or die out much, in fact I think it might well be swinging the other way again. Gen Z is apparently starting to return to the cinema's as well, not just music. CD sales are creeping back the other way too I understand. I don't know that from anything concrete, so don't thrash me for commenting as such, just what certain music YouTubers say. Origin Live have seen their business growing steadily over the last few years, so much so that they have invested in new CNC equipment recently and that's not cheap. So Mark Baker might disagree with the dying out statement too.
Younger friends of mine are buying LPs again, so there is an interest, it just maybe doesn't fit an individual opinion of what an audiophile is ....... and that is hugely subjective anyway IMO.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.