Has audiophilia changed your music taste?

Okay -- Sorry about the earlier cranky post.

I've had a nap and I'm in a better mood now.

>>I'm not suggesting that any of the great performers whom you listed are equivalent to the "audiophile tripe".<<

No -- quite the opposite. I'm saying there is a world
of difference between the "Tripe" [Or, musical equivilent
of those train records] and the list of performers I mentioned.

I will take part of the credit for the misunderstanding.

I probably didn't express myself clearly.

I listen to Clifford Brown for many reasons. He plays
the hell out of his instrument -- AND -- because I am
lucky enough to have what I consider to be a great
system -- I can get even closer to his music.

And, if I haven't made this point clearly enough --

I think it is far too simplistic to try to split people
into these two camps -- those who listen to the music and
those who listen to their system.

It is convenient, it makes for easy one-ups-man-ship,
but I also think it is silly and can short-circuit a
better conversation.

Finally, my answer to the question at the top of this
thread is: Yes, I find myself listening to different
music now that I have a nice system. I think it is
great music and it sounds great on my system.

It is less filling AND it tastes great.

It is the chicken AND the egg.

It is the Lady AND the Tiger.

It is round AND flat.

I didn't listen to this much classical and Jazz when I
was younger. For whatever reason, I've acquired a taste
for this music -- AND -- I find that it also sounds great on my system.

I put it on, I listen to my system and find that -- voila --
great music is playing and it sounds great, both my system
and the music until the system disappears and there's
only music and then it ends and I think, boy am I glad I
have this system!

No, and with all due respect, the day I switch to "audiophile" (ie sound not music - chair squeaks, paper shuffling, amp humming, and someone coughing) stuff is the day I sell my system and go back to my mini system.
Which by the way sounds almost as good as Levinson. You see, I'm a believer in equipment break in. After 17 years of "getting better every day" it's almost there.
Sean brought up a good point about overly detailed systems. But when you spend so much money you may want to impress yourself or your friends. Which detail does. As least for a while.
I just try to ask myself, is this how a live event would sound?

I think I should explain my sarcasm about break-in. I've been demoing equipment at home. If I return something because I don't like it, the dealer will invariably tell me the component is not broken in yet. Or I haven't listened long enough. So I got tired of the - break-in will solve all the problems you're hearing - routine.
The dealer who said I didn't listen long enough has a good point. If I listen enough my ears probably would adjust to the distortion. Then it would sound okay. But when I audition I will go for 3-5 days not listening to my stereo. Then my ears have adjusted to neutral. Then when I listen, I won't be used to the distortion and it will sound wrong to me.

I did not read the other post, but to answer the initial question is yes! I have found my taste become more tolerant. I have experimented with different sounds and started a basic Classical.

Still do not get the Opera craze or the newer Country which is just hashed over rock.

Have found myself likeing more Instrumentals than before and getting away from hard driving rock.

I would say having recently spent $1500 of your American Dollars upgrading my system, I have gone over my music collection and listened to CDs that have sat unused on the shelf for a while, just to hear the difference and found that my enjoyment of these CDs has increased. The recordings are obviously just as they always were, but through an improved system it sounds like they've been re-recorded 10 times better.

Through general experience, and through reading previous posts on Audiogon it seems to me that the majority of people who appreciate/own a decent hi-fi system (and I'm purposefully avoiding the word 'audiophile') tend towards the more 'mature' age range. This stands to reason in some ways, not least because of the costs involved.
The point I'm making is that older and younger people in general have overall different musical tastes, and so should explain the tendency towards jazz, or whatever. Diana Krall for example is a name I have regularly heard in hi-fi publications/discussions for 7 years, but never if a purely music based publication.
I'm trying to say that any music, from classical and pop, through funk to jungle (hands up who knows what that is!) can be well recorded and bring out the absolute best in a system, it's just maybe the uneven age distribution that lends weight to the idea of jazz or whatever obscure singer being needed to truly hear what a system can do.