He will only love the quality of the sound irrespective of whether it comes from a costly or a cheap speaker
An oxymoron as low end/budget speakers can only deliver so much quality... or quality itself is subjective in which case again its an oxymoron like situation.
A watch admirer is a big fan of the adulation, ego ,personal identity that emanates out of buying a costly brand.
The same can also be true of fine folks who buy costly branded musical equipment... DACs, speakers, amps, cables, etc. Just because they are spending on music does not make them free of ego or the desire of adulation.
Music is a native form of art and the most difficult to be defined. It is admired by lot of people because it has the unexplainable power of lifting your spirits, emotions, healing your soul. Scientists are researching music in the field of neurosciences to understand how it creates a certain pattern of neuron firing in your brain which helps us get out of depression.
Anyone with even a modicum of knowledge of metaphysics, quantum mechanics, etc. will tell you its all inside of us and not outside of us... and music is outside of us. Also, the same music/same track has a different effect on different people, in fact no 2 folks will be affected by the same song the same way.
Anyways I'm 100% in agreement here... I believe music uplifts, heals, brings emotional well being, etc. and I for one listen to a lot of music, nearly 14-18 hours a day in fact. That said a long drive also uplifts me, ditto for meditation and self hypnosis, or going around the block for a quick jog, or being in the Dojang.
Anything that brings you joy and/or happiness will have the same effect on you and that can be art and even watches. In other words some folks can become extremely happy with a watch or a car, but the same song that gives you and me joy can/might give them a headache. I know for sure the rock music that gives me immense joy used to drive my parents crazy when I was a teenager. Thankfully, now I have my own music room so I don't drive them nuts. Now this is true for everyone who has been a teenager or has a teenager, and in this case you cannot say music heals or uplifts. The same scientists will classify the same music as having negative properties to hurt and cause negative emotion and even disease. Now of course the argument can be made against rock or metal music and in favor of more soothing music... but again music itself is subjective, I listen to different kinds of music from pretty much everybody else on this forum. So the entire testing methodology is flawed unless you restrict certain types of music to certain ages or ethnicities... again a flawed premise since it should show same or similar results (in ideal test conditions). This I guarantee does not happen... if each one of us lists our personal best 10 tracks, we will all end up with entirely different lists as no 2 people have the same music in common, at least not 100% of the time. In such a case the test itself is flawed or if you can attribute different people are made better by different forms of music then the same attribution must be applied to others too like horses, dogs, cats, trains, cars, and watches.
Watches, Cars , bikes are all architectural beauty which fall under the category of applied arts. Applied arts do give you a kick, but its a momentary joy and the effect is not carried out after the interaction point.
Hence to answer your question , Yes they do have an effect on touching your soul but not as profound and long lasting as MUSIC has it
I believe I have already answered your question... so yes the music that touches my soul does not touch my mother's soul... it in fact drives her crazy. Heck my selection of music will probably drive even you crazy... so where is the talk of all music touching everybody's soul. In which case its a flawed theory at best... medicines, drugs, cars, houses and watches on the other hand are a pass as they deliver the same results for everyone, at least their intended result of showing time, healing pain, transportation, etc. Of course the same car or watch will not touch everybody's soul the same way... but then that's also true for music right?
Lets take these two situations :
1) If tomorrow an unknown brand designs a watch which is a scientific marvel and looks architecturally aesthetic but sells at only 50% of the price of an exactly similar watch from TISSOT. How many of the watch admirers do you think will even try this watch?
or on the corollary
2) If TISSOT themselves make this great watch but sells it under two different labels, one at price X and the other at only 50% price of X. Which one do you think the watch admirers will buy?
You know the answer already!!!
The same can be said of music too. How many will go with a newcomer (no matter how good and talented) over a Lata Mangeshkar or Pandit Jasraj? Nobody (in their right mind) right?
You know the answer too right? The claim music touches the soul is wrong... rather its music from the likes of Lata Mangeshkar, Pandit Jasraj, Kishore or Rafi that touches the soul and not music from the neighborhood kid who sings in his/her bathroom or down at the local bar or hotel.
How many will run to attend a concert from Pandit Jasraj and how many will run to attend a concert by the local music teacher? So is this not brand recognition for music then? So how can brand recognition be wrong for Tissot and not wrong for Pandit Jasraj? Are not the so called genuine music lovers in this case loving music based on the brand and not on the music?
I dont want to argue here...but i think some brand conscious ppl here are bcmg self defensive...
....and whatever that contradicts them are comfortably called just western canons....
Rather than showing disdain over other people thoughts...If somebody could really take the scenarios that i described and create a healthy argument to prove that it is not manifestation of personal identity i would be happy...
Don't take it personal, nobody here is trying to be personal. I am in fact trying to have a healthy argument and trying to show music cannot alone be given the criteria or the merit of being able to touch souls... even cars, paintings, beautiful locations (I once drove for half a day and reached a place where there was no one, not a single person. I sat there in complete silence and solitude for over 2 hours and that place has a profound effect on me even now when I think and go back there in my mind). Everything is down to personal preference end of the day... people don't like music or my kind of music and I don't like expensive watches, but saying I'm right and they are wrong is itself wrong. To each his own... if I find my nirvana in Nirvana (pun intended) then nothing wrong in others finding their nirvana in Tissot or Longines or even a Ferrari.
Anything that says my way or the highway is extremely archaic and should be out of place pretty much everywhere including HFV.
A genuine music lover will never fall under any of the trap situations mentioned here.. However a brand conscious audiophile could be ...
My argument is for a music lover and not for audiophiles!!
A person who is willing to spend lacs on speakers, DACs, amps and even wires cannot
not be a lover of music. Seriously think on that... being an audiophile by itself qualifies that person as a music lover. I mean will you spend on anything expensive if it does not further or increase the joy you are going to be getting from using that product or service? No right? You will only spend on something that increases your joy and happiness (going off topic but everything we do in life is to get more joy and happiness, that's everything in life like houses, cars, clothes, jewelry, beautiful spouses and yes watches too).
I cannot see how an audiophile cannot be a genuine music lover... at least not 99.99% of the time.
