"Is Audiophile Snobbery Ruining our Hobby ?"

[Zensō]

And snake-oil manufacturers invent problems their products alone can solve. (CD and LP demagnetisers?)

Of course ignorant audiophiles are happy to oblige by buying.

S.

I have to wonder if this is due to the fact that the audiophile “hobby” is predominately about buying gear, not creating something.

 

[sergeauckland]

Perhaps this is the moment to ask something technical about gear changes.

From what I have consistently reading, electronics for digital audio are a non-issue at this point of time: crystaline reproduction is possible even at low prices.

However, have speakers changed a lot in the last 20 years?

Good 'speakers haven't changed much, insofar as a low coloration, low distortion loudspeaker of the 1980s, so 40 years ago, let alone 20, is still a low coloration, low distortion loudspeaker.

What I think has changed, is that loudspeakers are no longer necessarily low coloration or low distortion, as so many have ragged frequency responses, poor directional control and try to sound 'different' and stand out at demonstrations.

On a more positive note, modern loudspeakers can go a lot louder and handle more power than those of the past, but how much this is of actual practical value in a home environment is moot. Certainly, the emphasis on home-cinema rather than stereo music has changed a manufacturer's priorities.

S.

 

[Shadrach]

UK based bods here may agree or not, but I feel the UK audiophile industry today is built on high prices, brand snobbery and long term 'desirability' of certain makers with 'upgrade ladders' now fueled by newly retired old boys like me but with pension payouts to spend on large car leases and stereo gear from mekers they couldn't afford forty years ago. We never really had a home theatre separates boom here since the early noughties (our rooms are too damned small I reckon), so the mid price market has gone over to once pricey used gear instead. the starter level is the Richer Sounds chain I think and some real bargains can be had if you're careful.

I as one UK based bod don't agree.
The above statement in bold illustrates the problem. Richer Sounds sell equipment that is measurably transparent but people on forums and in the audiophile Hi Fi shops tended to make statements exactly like this.
If the statement in bold isn't an example of snobbery I don't know what is.
Listening habits and the industry moved on. The so called Hi Fi industry didn't. It was never going to be in the interests of the audio consultants, the "specialist" Hi Fi shops, the Hi Fi porn mags to admit that much of the mass produced equipment did in fact perform adequately. The same can be said for the increasing popularity of mp3 players, ear buds, ipads, file audio and look far enough back digital in any form.
Spend £30 on a set of ear buds, link them up to a mobile phone and you can get measurably more than adequate performance. Just don't look good on the living room shrines though do they.

 

[Vacceo]

Good 'speakers haven't changed much, insofar as a low coloration, low distortion loudspeaker of the 1980s, so 40 years ago, let alone 20, is still a low coloration, low distortion loudspeaker.

What I think has changed, is that loudspeakers are no longer necessarily low coloration or low distortion, as so many have ragged frequency responses, poor directional control and try to sound 'different' and stand out at demonstrations.

On a more positive note, modern loudspeakers can go a lot louder and handle more power than those of the past, but how much this is of actual practical value in a home environment is moot. Certainly, the emphasis on home-cinema rather than stereo music has changed a manufacturer's priorities.

S.

Let´s put it in layman terms: I am debating if it is worth to change my current KEF IQ speakers for a more recent R series. My guess is that both are passive, both are designed by the same company with the same philosophy, and both will be used in a similar space. I assume the R series will be, logically, better in every way. However, the connandrum here is, how much better will they be? 50%? 100%? 10%?

 

[IPunchCholla]

Let´s put it in layman terms: I am debating if it is worth to change my current KEF IQ speakers for a more recent R series. My guess is that both are passive, both are designed by the same company with the same philosophy, and both will be used in a similar space. I assume the R series will be, logically, better in every way. However, the connandrum here is, how much better will they be? 50%? 100%? 10%?

10% would really be stretching it, no? Especially once it’s in your room.

I have 32 year old speakers that are totall crap in almost every way. Thinish MDF, little to no interior treatment, plastic surrounds and god knows how they cheaped out on the x-over.

But they sound good. So I got a Umic and REW and measured. Biggest issue was room modes. So I treated the room until till the room modes and impulse response was reasonable. Now the response is pretty dam flat from 40hz to 14khz Below 40 it drops significantly before bumping up again from 30 to 20. There is also still a null around 250. Not too bad, but enough I’m getting a sub to see if that will help. Above 1k it’s within +/- 3dB, which is better than I can tell with music. Distortion is low too, being only a percent or two off from some excellent monitors here. EQing both with REW and ARC3, make clear improvements in the sound, but honestly, blind, with a couple minutes between samples, I doubt I could A/B them. Back to back? Sure. So I’m left with wondering, given the limits of my hearing and my room, is ANY speaker going to make a huge difference? And I really really want the answer to be yes, since I hate everything about my speakers, except the way they sound.

 

[DSJR]

I as one UK based bod don't agree.
The above statement in bold illustrates the problem. Richer Sounds sell equipment that is measurably transparent but people on forums and in the audiophile Hi Fi shops tended to make statements exactly like this.
If the statement in bold isn't an example of snobbery I don't know what is.
Listening habits and the industry moved on. The so called Hi Fi industry didn't. It was never going to be in the interests of the audio consultants, the "specialist" Hi Fi shops, the Hi Fi porn mags to admit that much of the mass produced equipment did in fact perform adequately. The same can be said for the increasing popularity of mp3 players, ear buds, ipads, file audio and look far enough back digital in any form.
Spend £30 on a set of ear buds, link them up to a mobile phone and you can get measurably more than adequate performance. Just don't look good on the living room shrines though do they.

You think I look down on Richer Sounds? Nothing could be further than the truth as they generally give great service too I'm told by friends who've used them (I'm too wrapped up in mostly inherited vintage gear currently and no need to buy new at full retail price currently as I'm still just about in the trade). I use headphones all the time mostly via an Apple dongle and they're so damned unsociable if you want to share music. I agree that a carefully chosen set of relatively inexpensive headphones can give stunning performance and the generally good state of many phone outputs is all many need, at least to start with. Would you say that no earbud or headphone listener ever 'graduates' to loudspeakers?

 

[Vacceo]

10% would really be stretching it, no? Especially once it’s in your room.

I have 32 year old speakers that are totall crap in almost every way. Thinish MDF, little to no interior treatment, plastic surrounds and god knows how they cheaped out on the x-over.

But they sound good. So I got a Umic and REW and measured. Biggest issue was room modes. So I treated the room until till the room modes and impulse response was reasonable. Now the response is pretty dam flat from 40hz to 14khz Below 40 it drops significantly before bumping up again from 30 to 20. There is also still a null around 250. Not too bad, but enough I’m getting a sub to see if that will help. Above 1k it’s within +/- dB, which is better than I can tell with music. Distortion is low too, being only a percent or two off from some excellent monitors here. EQing both with REW and ARC3, make clear improvements in the sound, but honestly, blind, with a couple minutes between samples, I doubt I could A/B them. Back to back? Sure. So I’m left with wondering, given the limits of my hearing and my room, is ANY speaker going to make a huge difference? And I really really want the answer to be yes, since I hate everything about my speakers, except the way they sound.

I trully have no idea of the potential incremental improvements. That´s why I ask, because dumping some thousands of eurobucks is not something I do every weekend.

 

[JanesJr1]

I think the graph with all the devices of each class ordered by sinad and with great-poor regions has something to do with that...

Retire the graph or put it in a separate, single place on the site rather than in each review. In the review, just provide the measurement in the review and assign it to one of, say, four categories, A,B, C or D. A= inaudible THD+N, B= inaudible THD+N except in controlled conditions, C= audible under some conditions but compensating virtues, D= evidence of unsound engineering process. Or something like that but well-thought-out. Maybe also some other categories relating to power-handling, etc.

 

[sergeauckland]

Let´s put it in layman terms: I am debating if it is worth to change my current KEF IQ speakers for a more recent R series. My guess is that both are passive, both are designed by the same company with the same philosophy, and both will be used in a similar space. I assume the R series will be, logically, better in every way. However, the connandrum here is, how much better will they be? 50%? 100%? 10%?

Firstly, there's no guarantee that the newer 'speakers will be 'better', as 'better' is undefined. Maybe you will like them more, does that make them better? If so, how do you put a number on how much better? I don't know of any units of 'better'. I certainly wouldn't spend money, small or large, on 'speakers without seeing some measurements and comparing them to the ones I already have.

I use loudspeakers made in 1983, and have no desire to change.

S

 

[digitalfrost]

Haven't watched the video, but actually I think audiophile snobbery is keeping smaller stores in business.

Years ago, a friend of mine wanted to get his first system and we started visting audio stores. The first one, I didn't even wanna go in. Behind the window was only stuff we could never afford. McIntosh, Accuphase, you name it. Nothing for normal people.

I thought the guy would laugh at us and send us away. We told him what we wanted (tower speakers and and amp) and he went: "That's not easy for 2k." My friend was cocky and replied: "If it was easy, we wouldn't have come here."

While he wasn't that impressed with our budget, he put together two systems for us the next week. They were both better than any of the other ones we listened to at the other stores. We got a significant discount on the price too. Way below MSRP. I couldn't find that equipment that cheap anywhere on the internet.
After our first listening session we went upstairs and he was busy unboxing a 5.1 set of KEF Reference speakers. My eyes went wide.

Maybe the guy liked us because somewhat young people wanted to spent "serious" money on hifi. I couldn't help but think that discount was financed by the crazies that buy the expensive stuff. And most likely, these 2 systems he presented were the only ones he had within our budget. While I was intimidated by the shop window at first, that is now the store that I recommend to everyone who's asking me where to go.

I think selling highend stuff is probably the only way for this guy to run his shop. How can he compete if he sells the same stuff that you can also get at chain stores. I don't wanna turn this political but trickle down economics kinda works if you look at how much flagship technology eventually made it into affordable products. Somebody has to pay the bill for R&D, and it is the people who buy the "unnecessarily" expensive stuff.

As long as there's no snake oil involved I have no problem with expensive audio products.

 

[IPunchCholla]

I trully have no idea of the potential incremental improvements. That´s why I ask, because dumping some thousands of eurobucks is not something I do every weekend.

Do you know where you’re at now? A umic-1 is $100. REW is free. You can easily find out using those what is making the biggest impact, and how much of an improvement you might get by looking at the measurements of the speakers your interested. The value of those improvements is monetarily completely subjective to you. Slight gains might be worth a lot to you.

 

[Multicore]

Is Audiophile Snobbery Ruining our Hobby?

Ahem. Not everyone here identifies as an audiophile. Audiophillia per se is borderline perverse. I'm here for the hot tips on the best value/performance gear for annoying neighbors and frightening dogs.

 

[Zensō]

Not everyone here identifies as an audiophile.

I’d venture that close to a majority don’t, at least not in the traditional sense.

Audiophillia per se is borderline perverse.

Ha! I can’t disagree.

 

[Waxx]

It all depends on how much you care about what others think about your system. I don't care. I build my system for my enjoyment only, and if other like it, it's good, but if they don't, then it's bad luck for them...

But a lot of people's ego is depending on their audio system, their car, their house and mainly what others think about it. And for them it's their problem, i don't care. I drive a car that is practical, solid, reliable and cheap (but not fancy), I live in a house that i love and fits my lifestyle (but is to low key for most i think), .... and i don't care what you think about it. And they day i started to not caring anymore was a big liberation of my mind i have to say.

 

[Multicore]

It all depends on how much you care about what others think about your system. I don't care. I build my system for my enjoyment only, and if other like it, it's good, but if they don't, then it's bad luck for them...

But a lot of people's ego is depending on their audio system, their car, their house and mainly what others think about it. And for them it's their problem, i don't care. I drive a car that is practical, solid, reliable and cheap (but not fancy), I live in a house that i love and fits my lifestyle (but is to low key for most i think), .... and i don't care what you think about it. And they day i started to not caring anymore was a big liberation of my mind i have to say.

I lump all that together under the adornment heading. Having a record collection and a decent stereo was literally de rigueur in my cohort when I was in the 17-25 age range. Now I'm too old to care.

 

[Vacceo]

Do you know where you’re at now? A umic-1 is $100. REW is free. You can easily find out using those what is making the biggest impact, and how much of an improvement you might get by looking at the measurements of the speakers your interested. The value of those improvements is monetarily completely subjective to you. Slight gains might be worth a lot to you.

I have a friend willing to buy the old system, so that is actually a good plan, better than trying to push an ancient version of Audyssey.

The electronics will come first, but those are quite easy. Testing speakers in room is a no go (I do not live in the 'civilized part of the world'), but at least knowing with accuracy what the speakers do and can reach is a good start.

Thanks!

 

[Prana Ferox]

ASR amplifier reviews do not tell about reliability and possible issues and caveats, which could have been done by harder test conditions, especially loading and longterm testing. Though there is quite a wide set of selected measurements, to me the amplifier reviews do not tell much and I am losing interest to read them. Harder testing could also help the common users. And, I cannot l lose the feeling that some manufacturers just use ASR as a marketing platform and kind of their support.

Pavel, no one is going to send their nice amps to Amir if he torments them until they explode. And I know what you're trying to get at here but both at ASR and the fancy-mag reviewers there are enough stories of amps going in/out of protection or just failing to work in reasonable conditions that it's easy to note which ones just work fine.

ASR has a defined set of test sequences and manufacturers whose equipment looks great in those sequences would be fools if they weren't sending gear to Amir. That doesn't mean the sequences are somehow defective or irrelevant. The question that gets dodged is why gear that costs tons more, is made of much more expensive parts, or just used 'time-proven and tested' designs and manufacturing methods isn't doing better on those same sequences. You can argue the latter has better MTBF, but there is zero way with a sample size of 1 to evaluate that.

I always like the speaker testing better, beyond a fairly low threshold all the amps can do the job.

 

[antcollinet]

ASR amplifier reviews do not tell about reliability and possible issues and caveats, which could have been done by harder test conditions, especially loading and longterm testing. Though there is quite a wide set of selected measurements, to me the amplifier reviews do not tell much and I am losing interest to read them. Harder testing could also help the common users. And, I cannot l lose the feeling that some manufacturers just use ASR as a marketing platform and kind of their support.

It is not possible to do any meaningful reliability testing on a single unit.

That is simply not the role of ASR.

 

[steve59]

Haven't watched the video, but actually I think audiophile snobbery is keeping smaller stores in business.

Years ago, a friend of mine wanted to get his first system and we started visting audio stores. The first one, I didn't even wanna go in. Behind the window was only stuff we could never afford. McIntosh, Accuphase, you name it. Nothing for normal people.

I thought the guy would laugh at us and send us away. We told him what we wanted (tower speakers and and amp) and he went: "That's not easy for 2k." My friend was cocky and replied: "If it was easy, we wouldn't have come here."

While he wasn't that impressed with our budget, he put together two systems for us the next week. They were both better than any of the other ones we listened to at the other stores. We got a significant discount on the price too. Way below MSRP. I couldn't find that equipment that cheap anywhere on the internet.
After our first listening session we went upstairs and he was busy unboxing a 5.1 set of KEF Reference speakers. My eyes went wide.

Maybe the guy liked us because somewhat young people wanted to spent "serious" money on hifi. I couldn't help but think that discount was financed by the crazies that buy the expensive stuff. And most likely, these 2 systems he presented were the only ones he had within our budget. While I was intimidated by the shop window at first, that is now the store that I recommend to everyone who's asking me where to go.

I think selling highend stuff is probably the only way for this guy to run his shop. How can he compete if he sells the same stuff that you can also get at chain stores. I don't wanna turn this political but trickle down economics kinda works if you look at how much flagship technology eventually made it into affordable products. Somebody has to pay the bill for R&D, and it is the people who buy the "unnecessarily" expensive stuff.

As long as there's no snake oil involved I have no problem with expensive audio products.

I know it isn't popular to say here, but matching or mismatching components can make an audible difference and the shops that are still open are probably the shops that listen to their customers and know their products good enough to meet their needs at each price level.

Snobbery has a place in every hobby, I'm a bit of a snob when it comes to work ethic, but I wouldn't blame a lack of it on my attitude. maybe I missed the point completely

 

[ex audiophile]

I've been disappointed with Audioholics of late, especially for some very flattering reviews of stuff with no mention of possible conflicts of interest. Then I was watching this video:

At about 14 minutes Gene starts harshly criticizing ASR for basing recommendations on measurements, esp SINAD and grossly mis-characterizes the approach that most of us use. I would argue that @Amir and our other experts emphasize measurements as a reflection of engineering excellence and certainly don't push them as the only factor of importance when choosing gear. The video really raised the hair on my back and, for me, destroyed any remaining credibility over at Audioholics.