[nodiak]

Both, and the ratio varies to the circumstance. Last year on a surfing trip with my then 14 yo son I drove the beater Toyota truck with the horrifying cheap cassette deck and 60% distorting speakers. Grabbed a box of 20+ yo cassettes just to have something. I got to experience my sons intro to Mott the Hoople (All the young dudes), Bowie (Lodger), Hendrix, and others. He loved the music and felt great affinity with it, and we sang in the noisey truck to the terrible sq of the system. He didn't know it "sounded bad", but I could never have ignored that if we weren't having such a great time.
At home by myself there's a level of sq I don't want to go under. In the shop it's not as important. At the pool the aquarobics boom box echoes like crazy but I get into some of the tunes they play (some great Motown those ladies excercise to). Also a good song on TV is still a good song.
I know I'm more of a music lover because a system can be too revealing for my nervous system. But I'm part audiophile too because I want it to have a certain level of sq when I'm alone listening. Lately the audiophile is a little bummed because the room is holding the rest of the equipment back, but the music lover still finds plenty to enjoy.
Don

 

[konut]

I hate music. I've sent 10s of 1000s of $ buying software and hardware to listen to it. And what do I have to show for it? All the gear eventually wears out or becomes obsolete. The software won't play without the gear. The only long term reward for the hours of solitude, relaxation, and pleasure have been, maybe, to lower my blood pressure by a few points. Then I come to places like Audiocircle and there are people who ask questions about weather i'm an audiophile and/or a music lover and after thinking about it realise that the question is irrellivent because I really don't care about how they wish to classify me. They journey is as interesting as the destination.

[bprice2]

Its hard to drive without a car.

I know a lot of people who love music but don't have an audiophile system.  Using your analogy the car for an audiophile has to be "high performance" while the music lover is content with a car that functions.

I suddenly don't know what I'm arguing about anymore.

[markC]

I didn't realize that anyone was arguing. I think that trying to put an individual into a classification is wrong and will cause objections, as it should.
Put on some tunes, enjoy and kill this thread!

[In The Groove]

I think a real audiophile must love music as they are seeking the best possible experience.

[lonewolfny42]

I hear music in my head.....

[Wind Chaser]

I hear music in my head.....

You're in a good place.  I'd take that over the voices in my head any day.

[Wind Chaser]

Here's some more food for thought... When you see a live performance, how is that experience different from your headspace when you sit in front of your high end system?

When I listen to the "big rig" my mind is busy analyzing the characteristics of the sound; the strengths and weaknesses of the various aspects audiophiles tend to dissect the sound that their stereo produces.  This headspace is radically different from the way I approach the experience of live music.  Given a choice of one or the other, I'd rather attend a live performance than own the best audio system on the planet any day of the week.

[csero]

Here's some more food for thought... When you see a live performance, how is that experience different from your headspace when you sit in front of your high end system?

When I listen to the "big rig" my mind is busy analyzing the characteristics of the sound; the strengths and weaknesses of the various aspects audiophiles tend to dissect the sound that their stereo produces.  This headspace is radically different from the way I approach the experience of live music.  Given a choice of one or the other, I'd rather attend a live performance than own the best audio system on the planet any day of the week.

This is exactly my point. Home stereo reproduction is so fundamentally wrong that it will always force your brain into analyzing mode. The reason is that it offers wrong and conflicting psychoacoustical clues and your brain has to be busy sorting them out and deciding which one to accept and which one to ignore. It is just not natural.
Of course you can learn "your stereo" but in that case every other system - even the live music sometimes- will not be right any more for you.

[Thebiker]

I love my gear for the pleasure it provides and the nuances that are revealed in the music.

But, when I sit down to chill with music, I let it float with music.  The gear is a means to the end.  Depending on the mood, it could be Mozart or Meatloaf.  What's important is letting the artists communicate their music.  While chillin' it's the music, not the gear.

[Soundbitten]

Here's some more food for thought... When you see a live performance, how is that experience different from your headspace when you sit in front of your high end system?

When I listen to the "big rig" my mind is busy analyzing the characteristics of the sound; the strengths and weaknesses of the various aspects audiophiles tend to dissect the sound that their stereo produces.  This headspace is radically different from the way I approach the experience of live music.  Given a choice of one or the other, I'd rather attend a live performance than own the best audio system on the planet any day of the week.

This is exactly my point. Home stereo reproduction is so fundamentally wrong that it will always force your brain into analyzing mode. The reason is that it offers wrong and conflicting psychoacoustical clues and your brain has to be busy sorting them out and deciding which one to accept and which one to ignore. It is just not natural.
Of course you can learn "your stereo" but in that case every other system - even the live music sometimes- will not be right any more for you.

Have you ever been to a live performance where the acoustics sucked  ? I have , it's almost as bad as listening to a crummy stereo . You analyze your home stereo reproduction because it's under your control . A live performance isn't ... you're forced to just sit back , take it all in and enjoy the moment .

 

[Wind Chaser]

Have you ever been to a live performance where the acoustics sucked  ? I have , it's almost as bad as listening to a crummy stereo . You analyze your home stereo reproduction because it's under your control . A live performance isn't ... you're forced to just sit back , take it all in and enjoy the moment .

That's rarely been a problem for me.  I like the smaller more intimate shows where there's no such thing as a crappy seat.  Taking it all in and enjoying the moment is what it's all about.

[nathanm]

Here's some more food for thought... When you see a live performance, how is that experience different from your headspace when you sit in front of your high end system?

It's radically different.  Even if you set aside out all the non-sound stimuli which you are not receiving at home the sound itself is totally different.  The sound is coming from multiple sources and bouncing all over the place.  I think one way to fake it might be discreet tracks of instruments playing through speakers arranged in quasi-performer-like positions, and then you also will need colored lighting and smoke (be it cigarette smoke or dry ice) and additonal canned recording of drunks who won't stop hooting and hollaring even when the band they claim to love so much is playing, and most importantly, extreme volume.  Imagine if a band actually came and set up shop in your room.  It would be heard a block away.  If you aren't willing to do all that then I think comparing live music and recorded music is a silly thing.  Both are wonderful experiences, but fundamentally different.  The idea of "absolute sound" I think is pointless and could only be really narrowed down to perhaps human voice and single instrument or something.  I think the Decware folks once did a live-or-memorex kinda demo with a guy playing a...erm, one of those celtic things...between a set of speakers and seeing if it could be differentiated from a recording.  I wasn't there or anything, but I think that's the only time you can really make a grab for the 'absolute sound' theory.  Luckily, the rest of the time we are very pleased to experience heightened fantasy sounds.  And that is what most recordings are, it's supposed to be art, not virtual reality.  Mapleshade comes closest to virtual, but the raw, roomy, stereo sound is a distinct flavor of it's own.  If that was the only game in town it'd be very boring.

Have you ever been to a live performance where the acoustics sucked?

Yes, just about all of them!   Eagles Ballroom in Milwaukee, WI - if it gets worse than that I haven't heard it.  Well, maybe something like a stadium where you've got like 4 second echoes going on or something.  The bigger the venue the closer you want to be to the stage, otherwise it can be a muddled mess.