"audiophiles listen to their equipment"

Everyone, regardless of caring about sound quality is literally listening to the equipment, this includes the recording equipment. Beyond this why does someone else care about mine or anyone's listening preferences.

In order to choose new equipment we bring out our analytical skills and look for variables we can detect between equipment. The easiest is details and slam. They are both very easy to detect and rewarding... hearing stuff you never heard before. As you pursue the hobby you add additional parameters. 

The problem arises that you can get caught in the analytical mode and when you go home you stay in the analytical mode because what you bought A sound spectacular pleasing to the analytical mode, but does not communicate the music... there is nothing to drop back to. Over time, you end up with an incredible electronic instrument for reproducing sound and lost the music. Music and its emotional connection is primarily communicated through the midrange and rhythm and pace. You can completely loose that.

Then when you sit down and listen, to your system. What is there is incredible bass and detail, imaging but it doesn’t grab you and suck you in. Easy trap. One symptom of this is that you get bored with listening after forty five minutes or an hour. A musical system will glue you to it. After three hours of listening to my system I have to tear myself away... just one more tune!

Lots of high end audio manufactures have had to cater to what people want: incredibly detailed, shiny spectacular, transparent sound with huge kick...so that is what they give them. Some companies have remained true to the goals of producing the best music possible. They add detail and bass, but not at the expense of the music. The gestalt of the presentation must be right.  Most of these still use tubes (Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, VAC for instance), although some solid state manufactures are getting better. 

I agree and admit that the sound of an audiophile system is “inseparable from the music”.  For me, it is because the nuances of sound reproduction of an audiophile system, especially timbral accuracy, image density, micro-dynamics, macro-dynamics, and retrieval of ambient queues, bring me closer to memories of lithe sound of concerts I attended.  However, I have two listening modes.  Critical listening is reserved for system analysis, especially when contemplating a spend for new equipment, or when demonstrating my system to others.  In this mode I focus on the sound of the equipment.  I estimate I am only in critical listening mode 10% of the time.  90% of the time I am in musical appreciation (enjoyment) mode, not listening to equipment but rather to the composition and performance.  There was a time in my life when I focused only on the equipment, leading to a feeling of never being satisfied.  I have learned, or perhaps it is just an old age maturation process, where I am satisfied with my system and simply enjoy the music. 

Sorry. Spell check k got me again.  Cues not queues.  

Beyond this why does someone else care about mine or anyone's listening preferences.

Good question. 

I think it's because people who are caught in the endless upgrade cycle need a touchstone to help skyhook them out of it. That skyhook is, "This is supposed to be about the music." To which all I can say is, "Says who?"