[Mag]

It has been said that audiophiles like to listen to their gear more so than for music sake. So I've been trying to think which of my albums if any, I listen to because it sounds so darn good rather for its musical merits.
  This album when I first heard it on my friends stereo didn't do anything for me and thought it was a waste of money. I played it again later on my system which is more dynamic and just love it for the heavy articulate bass. Since there was nothing musically engaging the first time I heard it I figure I listened to it cause it makes my gear sound so darn good.
   The album 10,000 Days by Tool.
So is there any other audiophiles here that will admit that they sometimes listen to their gear and not the music. And what album do you play for its sound and not so much its musical merits?

[BradJudy]

Interesting that the one you mentioned is one that I bought for the music. 

I have some instrumental ones that I bought for their sound rather than music.  I either end up liking the music as well, or I end up rarely listening to them.  In the end, if I don't care much for the music, I don't listen to it much (although I might put it on a demo disc for auditioning/shows).

[Folsom]

I end up liking more music. It hurts my ears a LOT less with a nice DAC etc... It is also nice to hear insturements so I can enjoy the music via that aspect as well, as opposed to buzzing and thumping.

[chadh]

I think this experience goes both ways: potentially there is music you don't like that suddenly becomes worth a listen, but there is certainly also music that one likes that suddenly becomes unlistenable.

As for the first category, the closest I get is the one Patricia Barber disc I own.  I'm a jazz fan, but not usually into female vocals.  I do make some exceptions though (for example Ella, Cassandra Wilson and more recently have enjoyed Madeline Peyroux and an obscure disc by a singer named Kim Scanlon).  Given the widespread audiophile enthusiasm for Patricia Barber, I thought she'd be worth a try.  But when I heard her cover of "Light My Fire", I realized my error.

It's weird, though, that every now and again I'll put on that album.  I think it's more wishful thinking than anything:  that maybe after a while I'll recognize what makes her so appealing.  But after about a third of the album, I decide that I just find her tone really annoying.  I'm sure she's great, but her music is just not for me.  Despite this, her album has been picked off the slimserver more often over the past six months than any of the Pink Floyd albums I love.

Chad

[lcrim]

I tend to agree with chadh.  As my setups have improved, the ability to listen more deeply into the music has made some things more enjoyable to listen to.  The other side of the coin is that much popular music I previously enjoyed has become annoying.
Artists like Ricky Lee Jones or Thelonius Monk, where I previously was somewhat ambivalent about, as the quality of my playback has improved, the depth of their talent has been revealed even to me.
I always liked certain classical music but as I can now hear more of what is going on, the genius of Mozart or Haydn is more completely evident.

[Wayner]

Tool is hate music with zero ceiling. They can't sream any louder, play their crap music any louder, beat on the drums any louder. How is this band "audiophile" worthy?

[PhilNYC]

I tend to agree with chadh.  As my setups have improved, the ability to listen more deeply into the music has made some things more enjoyable to listen to.  The other side of the coin is that much popular music I previously enjoyed has become annoying.
Artists like Ricky Lee Jones or Thelonius Monk, where I previously was somewhat ambivalent about, as the quality of my playback has improved, the depth of their talent has been revealed even to me.
I always liked certain classical music but as I can now hear more of what is going on, the genius of Mozart or Haydn is more completely evident.

This is definitely representative of my opinion as well...lots of music I didn't appreciate until a good system revealed more depth to the performance. 

Admittedly, I did go through a phase of listening to "audiophile music"...more ambient or abstract stuff that is really special-effectsy and shows off some cool things that a good system can do...but got tired of it pretty quickly...

[arthurs]

(for example Ella, Cassandra Wilson and more recently have enjoyed Madeline Peyroux and an obscure disc by a singer named Kim Scanlon). 

Is that the "Night Songs and Lullabies" disc by Kim Scanlon?

[chadh]

(for example Ella, Cassandra Wilson and more recently have enjoyed Madeline Peyroux and an obscure disc by a singer named Kim Scanlon). 

Is that the "Night Songs and Lullabies" disc by Kim Scanlon?

Yes!  I bought this when my first son was young, as I thought he might enjoy it.  And four years later, I still love it.  Really simple arrangements, but such a pure, unadorned vocal style, and some REALLY lovely interpretations of songs.  There's a cover of James Taylor's "You Can Close Your Eyes" (originally recorded as a duet with...ummm...Joanie Mitchell?) that is just completely different, and totally beautiful.

Chad

[arthurs]

That's a really cool disc, have to pull it out of the archives....

[Toka]

Tool is hate music with zero ceiling. They can't sream any louder, play their crap music any louder, beat on the drums any louder. How is this band "audiophile" worthy?

I don't know if you've listened to much Tool...they are actually recorded very well, and are excellent (by rock standards anyway) musicians. Lateralus is my personal fave...give it a chance! 

[Wayner]

Sorry I blew up. A neighbor had one of their CD's and as a God fearing Christian, I couldn't stand it. Perhaps I will find some mp3's of the new album and give them a second chance. I do not understand where the anger is coming from in this new generations music, though. 

W

[Toka]

They aren't terribly 'angry', at least not compared to their other rock/metal acts...loud, yes, and some screaming...but it isn't "I'm gonna stab you!!" type stuff. They mine the 'disillusioned youth' angle a little too much sometimes, and come off as awfully pretentious, but they have more in common musically with, say, King Crimson than Marilyn Manson or whatever.

[miklorsmith]

There's a lot of Christian rock that's much harder than Tool.

[JoshK]

Tool seems to be a love it or hate it thing for many.  I am in the love it camp, for the music, not the words.  I admittedly don't listen to lyrics hardly at all.  This was quickly realized when my wife starts singing along and I am like, "so that is what they are saying?"  If I did listen to their lyrics, I too would probably find them pretentious and self righteous at best. 

A lot of their music is shocking on the surface, but it is only a metaphor for what the song was really about, at least this is true for most all of Undertow.  Then they went into Jungian philosophy and conscious evolution, etc.  They think they are modern philosophers or something.  I don't really care, their grooves are too infectious. 

Of music I bought for audiophiledom, it all is Jazz, and all but an alb or two of that I sold a while ago.  I find I just don't like jazz.  To me, jazz is synonomous with audiophile music and I tire of it quickly.

[JoshK]

There's a lot of Christian rock that's much harder than Tool.

Dream Theater is an easy example, and they are tame by a lot of standards compared to some. 

[BradJudy]

Yeah, Tool has a darker tone, but they don't even qualify as metal, let alone metal that Christians should particularly dislike.  I'm not saying they're Amy Grant, but they definitely aren't hate music. 

Don't let the delivery lead you to misunderstand the content/intent.  You might miss out on some good stuff. 

[zapper7]

Just returning from CES, all you here is jazz , or simple "sounds" (albeit recorded well). We actually brought our own stuff, and was a relief to many who exibitors who endure for the whole show.
We particularly had a great time in the Bel Canto suite where we/they played Chilli Peppers, Queensryche, Disturbed, etc. at party levels . The gear did sound great with my interest in their new CDP with volume control.
I think "audiophile music" is music listen to by audiophiles, the good recordings get the attention, but the great majority of music bought/ripped is of the average variety. A system that makes those recordings sound great to their owner is an audiophile system listened by an audiophile (lover of music and gear) .

[Carlman]

I tend to find something really interesting in an album or just a song or 2 of a particular artist and overdose on it... and inevitably tire of it.  I'm like a radio station... playing 'Carl's hits' all day long.  Once that rotation gets old, I add a new one.
I recognize good recording and post-production efforts, though.  I get tired of the Coldplay-level compression and all-slides-to-the-top mixing style of many new artists. 

It's funny someone mentioned Pat Barber.  I wish I could hear her (band's) music with someone else's voice.  She sounds like a man trying to sound like a woman to me... and I can't get the tranny visual from overtaking the actual music when I listen... and I just laugh. 

I can get into old Neil Diamond, and enjoy it immensely... but I can get into Stone Temple Pilots, XTC, or Jack Johnson... just depends... I've found 'audiophile' music means whatever I like.... Since I am one... and enjoy all sorts of stuff.

-C

[miklorsmith]

Tom Waits has struck me as an aphile act.  I doubt many regular folks are listening for the "music".