Frustration of the Euphonophile Salesman. Audiophile evaluation methods & intentions.

Through February 2025, and with today's third post of the month, I've been exploring the current audiophile culture with videos from contemporary YouTube channels. While never exactly the same among participants, we can see "archetypal" characteristics shared among personalities in this hobby.

We've talked about the technical channel that presented facts but also blurs boundaries into unusual beliefs to make sales and justify products, the subjective-only hobbyist channel willing to do listening tests (great!), and today let's talk about the audiophile who appears to insist on purely subjective-based evaluation, rejects objective measurements, and is a salesman in the Industry.

I'm talking about OCD Hi-Fi Guy who's quite an entertaining fellow. He calls it like he sees it - "no BS" - I can respect that to a point. His name is Mike "Mikey" Powell and he runs a company called 11 Stereo. His followers are known as the "HiFi Tribe" and in the videos, we see promotions of the companies and products that he represents including Playback Designs DACs and Fischer & Fischer speakers, prominently mentioned among others. 

Every once awhile you'll see on my blog a reference to something on his channel that I found entertaining - like this post addressing the interview with Machina Dynamica guy. His use of diction suggests an intelligent fellow but I suspect he comes across a bit "spicy" in his language for many audiophile gentlemen and gentleladies. At other times, some of his viewpoints around politics and towards other cultures might be unpalatable.

If you watch his videos, I think it becomes quite clear that his moniker is inaccurate because he is neither "OCD" (his answers are far from perfectionistic), nor is his philosophy towards audio particularly "Hi-Fi" (high fidelity). Let's have a deeper look at this with a recent video that's entertaining, yet highlights the frustration that I think some salesmen might experience online these days as they try to assert unsubstantiated beliefs.

For discussion - "HOW TO MISLEAD AN AUDIOPHILE!!" - yes sir, please show us. Thankfully there is no need to watch it for long, just have a look/listen to the first 5 minutes and you'll get what I'll be addressing:

First, notice the implicit indignant frustration in his voice and non-verbal communication style. Right near the start, he clearly has an issue with measurements: "Only dou*hebags record measurements on speakers?". Oh my, why so angry!? 🤔

[Here's another video showing this same attitude about measurements so this isn't a one-off sentiment.]

Clearly, he's impressing upon his audience to drop the idea of looking at speaker measurements. That we don't want "flat" frequency responses. To wish our speakers could be "flat" would "homogenize all speakers so they all sound the same?". And that "the beauty of speakers... is that they have different tunings", with a caveat that "as long as it's within 3dB's" then it's OK which I guess is not unreasonable.

Realize of course that a true 3dB range is pretty tight, so if he insists that this is a criterion of good frequency response, would that not also argue that we should measure and confirm that our speakers satisfy this, including his favorite slate Fischer & Fischers? I don't see any evidence on his 11 Stereo site nor the company's website to show that the 3dB range has been cleanly achieved across the audible spectrum with the US$30k/each F&F SN570 other than a quick company spec line item which is often just a liberal approximation.

He tries to drive a wedge between pro studio audio and the audiophile. That audiophiles are trying to "paint our own masterpiece(s)". That to paint, "we use colors", examples being "we use vacuum tubes" and different brands purposely "flavor" things. There's the quaint notion of how speaker brands try to "connect you to the music on an emotional level". How being analytical as per studio professionals, "is a pain in the ass, it's taxing, it's a drag, it's absolutely no fun".

He says: "The only way to enjoy music in my opinion is to connect on an emotional level with the music, and if that takes a whacked out frequency curve, or if it takes off-axis things that don't work right or anomalies, well then that's what it takes."

Furthermore, he tries to convince us that he's "been there" with taking measurements for "25 years of my life", including having tested various electronic parts. "And the bottom line is that means f*ck all, okay? Except for does it connect you with the music emotionally?"

Ultimately for him "the measurement thing is bullsh*t". If one wants to get down to measurements, "go to frickin' engineering school and design your own sh*t". "But to bring designs and how things work into the end-user environment, I get it for DIY, ... but to tell audio enthusiasts/audiophiles how a crossover works... you don't need to know that sh*t."

Maybe Mikey and I at least share some concerns about the GR-Research messaging. 😐 Although my issues with GR-Research do not have to do with the teaching of electronics, but the questionable extent and beliefs that Danny holds as to the magnitude (or even actual presence) of supposedly audible effects with the parts he sells.

Obviously, I don't agree with much of what Mike is saying or what he's trying to impress upon his viewers. Let's dive in and discuss a few main concerning points:

1. As you can see, Mikey gets pretty revved up and foul. I'm generally OK with the language but if one wants a good honest debate or discussion, we really shouldn't get so aggressive.

In another video, don't dare question the quality of his Fischer & Fischer speakers he sells/represents! 😱 Nasty, dude.

I mean seriously, he could have just been gentlemanly and suggested that the commenter made a mistake and the slate material, due to its microarchitecture, might reduce vibrational energy as it runs across the metamorphic rock as per this hypothesis. I imagine F&F would be happy with such a knowledgeable dealer. But no, he gives a hot-headed response instead which just escalates things and takes us away from discussions of science or facts. Name-calling and allegations of "14 years old in his parents' home" from a salesman towards a potential client/customer I don't think is a good look. Assertiveness, even strong correction of mistruths, usually does not require anger. These days, IMO, no matter what profession we are in, people will disagree and one cannot act like this, expecting that everybody has to fall in line. Especially when it's obvious that much of what he thinks he knows is very biased in many of these videos!

Yeah, YouTube and the Internet can be silly in all kinds of ways because we humans can get emotional like this and "truth" unfortunately gets sacrificed as opinions drive the narrative rather than actual discussion or debate. Let's be honest, "click bait" and outrage does drive traffic and there are lots of people who seem to love that kind of stuff. Good for monetization if one is rewarded for number of views.

This is why I still prefer the written word. We can often be more deliberate with our choice of language, allowing time for the mind to formulate and hopefully better express ideas rather than project emotions. And I believe in the long run, written thoughts will have more power to permeate the audiophile culture than dramatic, but ephemeral emotions.

2. Why the negativity against measurements?

To a large extent, my response to anti-objectivism was laid out a few years ago in the discussion about John DeVore's comments.

The act of measuring is not a moral thing so I don't think there's ever a need to judge anyone harshly for doing so!

We might be totally disgusted by a guy who does an immoral act and in our frustration call him a "dou*hebag" or an "asshole", but what's wrong with the audiophile who takes the time to measure electrical activity or the soundwaves in his room and reports his observations?

Regardless of what Mikey thinks, measurements are simply necessary when it comes to audio equipment, designed based on scientific principles. There are technical "targets" that represent engineered excellence whether Mikey likes them to be there or not (surely all audiophiles can agree that low noise level, measurable, is important right?).

As audiophiles, IMO, we need to be thankful that such technical targets exist if not at least to help manufacturers monitor and apply quality controls even if end-user hobbyists don't want/need to know the intricacies.

3. He's frustrated that doing measurements implies a desire for homogeneity. Argument of an euphonophile.

If one is a believer in achieving "high-fidelity sound", then there should be some concept of what "ideal fidelity" must sound like, right? In order to judge products as "high", "low", or maybe "mid" fidelity, there must be some kind of standard to aim for.

By definition, something high-fidelity must approach that ideal target in a close-to-transparent fashion. Does this mean all high fidelity sound systems end up being "homogenized" and sound similar? The answer is yes because it has to! In high-fidelity audio, the quest for transparent sound quality is not some stylistic subjective option by definition.

"High-fidelity", high resolution DACs ultimately sound the same; this is why price points IMO become less relevant over time judged on sound quality alone. Ideal amplifiers will sound like a "straight wire with gain". Cables should not impart their own "sound" in hi-fi other than conveying the sound of the recording from the source to the amp to speakers. And yes, speakers themselves should create soundwaves (with room contributions) reaching our ears at the listening position (or headphone audio pumping sound into the ear canal) approximating closely to what's on the source recording.

Instead of homogeneity, Mikey advocates for coloration as a function of the components we buy; that companies purposely "tune" their products to a sound, the concept of "emotional connection" as his end-all-and-be-all. As I have implied before, this is the path of the euphonophile (in contrast to the high-fidelity enthusiast). Within that mindset, as one would expect, the idea is that euphonic distortions exist and for each of us, we somehow should explore those combinations of tuned colorations to optimally "connect... on an emotional level".

At the highest level, I trust all audiophiles, myself and Mikey included, appreciate that we're in this hobby in the service of enjoying music (we're all music lovers first!).

From that "music first" starting point, for the purpose of this discussion, beyond just categorical descriptions like "objectivist" or "subjectivist", we can be more nuanced and look at the two dimensions of how we define ourselves as audiophiles. How do we evaluate sound quality and what are the intentions / expected outcomes of our choices:

In a future blog post, maybe we can have some fun and convert this to a rating scale.

I encourage you to think about those two dimensions, your values, and where you would place yourself in each. If we understand ourselves and can explain our perspective, then I think there's much less misunderstanding or need for fruitless debates.

When it comes to the audiophile hardware pursuit, most of us I hope employ a combination of the objective and subjective to evaluate sound quality, recognizing that both modes of evaluation will tell us something useful about the quality of the gear. Whether we aim towards "euphonic" reproduction and its sweetening colorations that cater to our preferences with the benefit of the system being potentially more forgiving of poorer recordings, or more of a "just the facts" path towards high-fidelity audio that lays the recordings bare, warts and all, is up to us.

[I'm obviously "more objective" in my way of evaluating good gear based typically on measurements, and I prefer hi-fi reproduction which ultimately does homogenize the sound of DACs, more transparent amps favored, and speakers behave more predictably with flatter response plus better time-domain performance. 

Price points make no difference to me and I fully expect that over time with better technology, hi-fi sound can be less expensive, accessible to more music lovers, and provide better value. That just makes most sense to me.]

Nobody's a "dou*hebag" for making their own choices!

Even if I were a euphonophile, I would find myself quite frustrated with no access to measurements, foundational knowledge about how devices work, or what parts of the system make any difference (ie. cables for the most part make no audible difference). I'd love to see on a graph if my speakers have the "BBC Dip" and whether I liked this. Without measurements, I would not know how much my tube amp enhanced 2nd and 3rd harmonics to add "fullness" to the sound or what depth of noise floor I'm OK with. If I have a favorite DAC, I might not be able to confirm what digital filter setting is favored or if I liked a little high-end roll-off. Perhaps I'm just a bit more perfectionistic than "OCD Hi-Fi Guy" in wanting to understand these things about myself. Without factual knowledge, it'd all be just trial and error, buying/borrowing this amp and that DAC and this other speaker with no real verifiable direction.

Perhaps this kind of ignorance is what salespeople prefer for us. That somehow we should have confidence in what these people tell/sell us. For example, I see over and over again in his videos that Mikey thinks the Playback Designs MPD-8 Dream DAC (US$26k, see his hype video of the internals) is the most awesome DAC - but is it, really? That kind of money for some mu-metal shielded transformers and internal resampling of most input to DSD128 (just Double-rate DSD) through Xilinx FPGAs, released in 2018?

Spare the chatter, if Andreas Koch produced a great design, it'll show in the measurements of actual noise floor and dynamic range, frequency extension, jitter performance, linearity; it's just a 2-channel DAC after all. Like other items, say a fancy watch, does it tell time any better than an inexpensive utilitarian Timex digital? If not, value is determined by the non-utilitarian luxury benefits; not time or audio fidelity.

[I see Mikey wrote this response in one of the comments to his video (capitalized emphasis his): 

"99% of my buyers couldn't give 2 shits about a microphone or whether it's anechoically flat or room flat.. they care how it sounds. So if you like getting off in the weeds about audio, there are DIY things for that. But MY CUSTOMER BASE, spends 50K minimum and does not give a shit about specs.. they trust me to guide them. They have no desire to become armchair 'engineers'.. they have other things to spend time on... so naturally, I speak to my people..."

So his customers are big spenders (minimum $50k!?) who trust him but have little actual knowledge or interest about specifications of the products they buy? That's the "tribe"? Not exactly an inviting "big tent" intelligent audiophilia. More like a small cultish club with members who need to be careful that they don't look like they're criticizing the temperamental leader in live chats! 🥹

Just because an intelligent hobbyist wants to understand electronics, desires to see measurements, does not make him an "armchair engineer", right? That's pretty condescending to think that audiophiles shouldn't by nature of their curiosity expand their knowledge. IMO, that's a terrible mindset with a rigid stereotypical view as to who his "tribe" should be! I guess so long as he finds adequate sheep customers to target, that's a career...]

A couple of final points before leaving this section:

A. There is no need for judgment when it comes to one's taste and intent in achieving euphonic sounding systems, just be honest with what you're calling yourself! 

As Mikey says: "if that takes a whacked out frequency curve, or if it takes off-axis things that don't work right or anomalies, well then that's what it takes". Absolutely fine. However, if this is what you're after, it is a misnomer to call yourself a "Hi-Fi" enthusiast. I do not believe the definition of "high fidelity" audio reproduction includes "whacked out" speaker frequency responses!

There is nothing wrong with identifying oneself as a euphonophile. In fact, I hope more audiophiles are clear about their intentions with their systems and be proud of being an "euphonophile audiophile" or "audiophile who prefers euphonic sound based on personal taste". 

B. An objective-leaning audiophile does not have to aim for hi-fi homogeneity. Just because we derive objective knowledge using measurements does not mean we can't prefer "anomalies" or consciously apply idiosyncratic frequency responses - say I liked the sound of the Spendor SA1 and EQ'ed my system to that "color". 

Nothing wrong with being an "objective euphonophile"! When listening, I will often color my EQ to taste, add a bit of BBC dip, turn on DTS Neural X decoding, maybe add some "center spread" in Dolby Surround with 2-channel material if doing these things sound good even though these are not my main modes of hi-fi listening especially when reviewing a product. 

Or conversely a "subjective hi-fi enthusiast" who has ear training and knows what clean, accurate reproduction sounds like.

OCD Hi-Fi Guy wants audiophiles to "paint a masterpiece" by selecting the pieces of their audio systems. So do I, but I think it's better to let hobbyists learn how to be great "artists" by giving them knowledge of how to use the brushes, colors, and skills to also understand themselves, not just the hardware. Definitely not mainly relying on one guy's opinion and his curation of stuff he sells.

 

4. Hi-Fi hobbyists and Pro Audio engineers are not that far apart!

I think it's best for audiophiles to recognize that we should not bite the hands that feed us! It is thanks to the pro audio world that we have excellent quality recordings to enjoy. We must not view pro audio as just the analytical guys "trying to master sh!t" and listening to details as if we don't have a desire to hear all that the artists and engineers working in the studio purposely wanted to include in their recordings.

Ultimately, the goals of good studio gear and home audio are really the same when it comes to high-fidelity results. Home audio gear might look different (furniture grade and WAF important), target a different luxury level, and often are built to even higher fidelity specifications than the average studio equipment. Nothing stops a studio from using the same gear like those B&W 800 Diamond series at Abbey Road Studios, and we at home can use products like the "studio" RME ADI-2 line of DAC/ADCs that sound great!

One important job I think we can do as audiophile music lovers of all variants is to provide feedback to the studio engineers like reminding them not to over-compress the dynamics of our favorite albums so they sound more natural with accurate hi-fi systems! A growing, respectable, audiophile hobby with knowledgeable participants who value sound quality might have enough power to influence artists, record labels, and engineers to achieve better. 

5. Unusual perspectives, ignorant attitudes, and political leanings.

As an obvious observation, notice some bizarreness seeping through in the OCD Hi-Fi Guy channel. Stuff like unusual beliefs about the nature of "minerals do something in electromagnetism" mentioned before in his Verastarr cables (hmmm, is that name a nod to the group Atlantic Starr?).

Or how about Mikey's evaluation of others as "egotistical, arrogant, prideful..."? Some of that could be true, but I haven't noticed too many such issues over the last decade going to audio shows. Maybe he should also on occasion look at the man in the mirror. Especially when he always touts his own room at audio shows as inevitably "BEST IN SHOW".

Then there are some rather simplistic and ignorant comments about China (also see here) and Chinese-made products. I'm no fan of a communist-branded "totalitarian free-enterprise" system either, but obviously it has allowed many of its citizens to come out of poverty over the last few decades. Many in the world, probably including many in the USA, I suspect experience envy that China is the largest manufacturing nation now. Currently, global manufacturing output from China has essentially doubled the USA. Do not think that trade deficits have not improved the quality of life of the average American, villainizing other nations as if they're taking advantage; you've wanted more from other nations than they need from you in materials/manufactured trade.

[Based on this idea of deficits, we see threats of disruptive tariffs that will simply hurt everyone and more than likely will be abandoned very quickly given what Americans have become accustomed to. And isolationistic policies will obviously have negative repercussions in a highly interconnected world.]

Many around the world will just as easily look at the American brand of "freedom" with its weak social supports, potentially financially ruinous health care system, unconscionable gun policies (imagine any other country with 48k deaths/year related to guns, about 30% from homicides, more young people die from this than anything else in that society) and current leadership as abhorrent. I see Mikey can be pretty easily triggered about politics and social issues - see here.

There was a time when "Made in Japan", "Made in Taiwan", and "Made in Korea" were seen as signs of poor workmanship and reliability; not so much any more as these countries have become leaders in various types of products. And so too this may shift for that "Made in China" sentiment as we consider the quality of our iPhones and countless other things. 

Much remains unknown, and we'll see in the years ahead whether China will indeed move forward to develop their reputation for higher quality, luxury goods, across many types of products. Whether the USA can actually motivate its populace to compete in a tough manufacturing economic climate as they obviously are hoping to bring production "home" will be interesting (and likely painful) to watch.

OCD Mikey is a fascinating salesman. A persona representative of an "edgier", darker, indignant, and cognitively dissonant side of the subjective euphonophilic pursuit. Perhaps this is what some folks like to see/hear and the kind of person they're happy to buy from; beyond watching his videos for mere entertainment value.

Enough said. And enough YouTube watching for a little while for me. 🥱

--------------------

To end, if you're a fan of Elton John's music, make sure to check out his Diamonds Deluxe compilation (CD originally out 2017, DR8) and available on a Super Deluxe Edition BluRay with 48 songs in TrueHD-Atmos lossless with 7.1 bed layer (DR13; as usual, higher dynamic range with multichannel mixes). Too bad the duet with George Michael ("Don't Let The Sun Go Down On Me") didn't get the multichannel treatment.

Unfortunately, these SDE releases get sold out very quickly so keep an eye out if you ever see them available at a decent price.

To end; here's a blast from the past - Atlantic Starr's #1 hit from 1987 - "Always":