Hey all. After participating in some other HiFi forums on Facebook, I have thought a bit about how the HiFi market actually works and what role ASR actually plays in this market. Here are my thoughts.
I believe that ASR has become an important voice in the HiFi community, insofar as it is at all relevant to talk about such a community. ASR has achieved a position where it cannot be ignored and it has given strength to the argument that there is an objective and measurable aspect of all HiFi, and that good measurement results often have a weak connection between price and the status of a HiFi brand. In connection with this, a group of HiFi consumers has emerged who reject subjective non-factual claims about HiFi, when these are in conflict with measurable results - so-called objectivists vs subjectivists (I think this is a somewhat misleading dichotomy because objectivism in some respects can be another form of subjectivism, on another level)
There are now also manufacturers, mainly from China, who are completely focused on producing products that are objectively as good as possible, ie that strive to achieve as good measurement values as possible . For those consumers who base their purchasing decisions on objectively measured values and want that type of product, ASR has also become a platform where these producers can showcase their new products. Regardless of ASR's intentions, ASR becomes a form of marketing platform. This in itself is not a negative thing, but it does lead to the question of other producers.
Many of the traditional companies in HiFi never seem to send any products to ASR to have them measured. Is it because they think that the "objectivists" are too small a market? Is it because they do not think that “objectively correct sound is desirable at all? Do they think that objective measurements are not at all desirable because everything will then sound the same? Is it because they know that design and subjective experiences are more important decision criteria for the majority of consumers rather than objective facts? Is it because they make products that they know do not measure up? Are they simply incompetent? Or is it about money, ie that it costs more to develop products that measure well without giving any real advantage in the market? Or is it that some HiFi brands simply charge for something other than the performance of the products, ie is a market based on objective measurement data pure death for the high-end market in HiFi? Much of the HiFi press indicates that this may be the case. (There is almost always a high price the same as good reviews) If they hand over their products to ASR then they know that the discussion will only be about one thing, about a single aspect, and that discussion they do not want?
My thought is, is this good or bad? Does this ultimately lead to a division of HiFi consumers into two camps and into two different markets? Is it an illusion that products based on objective data will penetrate the HiFi world as a whole, or will it be a limited niche market within HiFi.
I believe that ASR has become an important voice in the HiFi community, insofar as it is at all relevant to talk about such a community. ASR has achieved a position where it cannot be ignored and it has given strength to the argument that there is an objective and measurable aspect of all HiFi, and that good measurement results often have a weak connection between price and the status of a HiFi brand. In connection with this, a group of HiFi consumers has emerged who reject subjective non-factual claims about HiFi, when these are in conflict with measurable results - so-called objectivists vs subjectivists (I think this is a somewhat misleading dichotomy because objectivism in some respects can be another form of subjectivism, on another level)
There are now also manufacturers, mainly from China, who are completely focused on producing products that are objectively as good as possible, ie that strive to achieve as good measurement values as possible . For those consumers who base their purchasing decisions on objectively measured values and want that type of product, ASR has also become a platform where these producers can showcase their new products. Regardless of ASR's intentions, ASR becomes a form of marketing platform. This in itself is not a negative thing, but it does lead to the question of other producers.
Many of the traditional companies in HiFi never seem to send any products to ASR to have them measured. Is it because they think that the "objectivists" are too small a market? Is it because they do not think that “objectively correct sound is desirable at all? Do they think that objective measurements are not at all desirable because everything will then sound the same? Is it because they know that design and subjective experiences are more important decision criteria for the majority of consumers rather than objective facts? Is it because they make products that they know do not measure up? Are they simply incompetent? Or is it about money, ie that it costs more to develop products that measure well without giving any real advantage in the market? Or is it that some HiFi brands simply charge for something other than the performance of the products, ie is a market based on objective measurement data pure death for the high-end market in HiFi? Much of the HiFi press indicates that this may be the case. (There is almost always a high price the same as good reviews) If they hand over their products to ASR then they know that the discussion will only be about one thing, about a single aspect, and that discussion they do not want?
My thought is, is this good or bad? Does this ultimately lead to a division of HiFi consumers into two camps and into two different markets? Is it an illusion that products based on objective data will penetrate the HiFi world as a whole, or will it be a limited niche market within HiFi.