[Folsom]

I asked him what he listens to Jazz on... He said just normal stuff but he use to subscribe to Stereophile for awhile. I guess he has an old Pro-Logic thing with settings like "Hall" from his description.

Here is the kicker....

"Well I think you don't need a really nice stereo for Jazz, it is just the type of music you wouldn't need it for"

Uhhh??? The majority of people I know that listen to it all are audiophiles. Plus the whole thing with Jazz and improvising onto laid out songs, it is all in the suttleties where the music is beautiful; I am pretty sure it is one of the most important reasons to have a nice "stereo".

[Berndt]

I also took a history of jazz class, the teacher pa'd the music through a bass amp.
I didn't like jazz at the time so it seemed fitting, not my sentiments now mind you.
I have noticed I am able to create the best sound out of my system by playing jazz, and vinyl.
My total playback front end is 300$, including speakers.

[kfr01]

This is the classic case of your prof. not knowing what he's missing! (imo)

[MaxCast]

"Well I think you don't need a really nice stereo for Jazz, it is just the type of music you wouldn't need it for"

Invite him over for a listen.

[Dan Driscoll]

Being a music lover has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a person is an audiophile. 

[JLM]

Jazz is not a particularly hard challenge to reproduce.  No deep bass, no extreme spl's, smaller ensembles.

Musicans don't need as many audible cues to recreate the sound in their minds.  (Isn't that the point of our systems?)

[ZLS]

The essence of Jazz is time. A corollary to this is the interplay between musicians anticipates and answers what the other musicians are doing.  There is a tension in great Jazz, the spontaneous striving for the perfect musical phrase.  Any sound system, no matter how expensive that destroys that sense of time, effectively destroys the heart and soul of the music.  Count Basie was once asked to describe the music he played.  He smiled and said, "Pat your foot".

[fajimr]

obviously the prof is an "historian"... maybe you'll be able to teach him/her a thing or two about music 
and i say that in all sincerity.... any teacher worth their weight in audio gear should be open to learning experiences themselves...

stick in there and let us know what you learn from the class and what the class learns from you

[ooheadsoo]

obviously the prof is an "historian"... maybe you'll be able to teach him/her a thing or two about music 
and i say that in all sincerity.... any teacher worth their weight in audio gear should be open to learning experiences themselves...

stick in there and let us know what you learn from the class and what the class learns from you

I studied music history formally for 6-7 years or so, so far, been around musicians all my life, and I can probably count on 1 hand the number of them that obsess about their audio systems, and out of all of them, maybe one of my professors obsessed about it as much as I do, and he listens to shellac records from the turn of the century, so forget about fidelity.  None of my small handful of friends I know doing recording care much about their systems.  It's just a tool that helps them get the job done.  Anything else is above and beyond, icing on the cake.  Now, I don't know all that many people and I'm not the most social guy in the world, so maybe all the people I used to walk by in the halls that I didn't talk to were audiophiles - but I doubt it.  You telling me my professors and fellow students were just "historians" or "musicians" and that being an audiophile makes you know something about music.  Don't kid yourself.  They've got the score.  (j/k)