For many years now, I've applied the principle of 'adequacy' to any judgements I make about anything. What do I need the item to do, and how well, then look at the specs / measurements to decide which item comes closest. I then buy the cheapest that meets my requirements. The important part is to specify one's requirements completely, including such intangibles as 'build quality', serviceability' and 'appearance' which I accept are subjective, but it's my spec I'm buying against. What this means is that I don't necessarily by the cheapest of any one item, as even if the measurements are adequate, the item fails on the build quality or other 'subjective' parts.
It can therefore be said that I'm no different to subjectivists who buy on perceived (non blind tested or level matched) sound quality, but in reality, because evaluations are not done blind, their choice is perhaps made on anything but sound quality, whereas in my case, I never bother to listen first to anything I buy in audio. I just need a detailed set of measurements, which is why I find this forum so useful. It's a pity that it's impractical for Amirm to do loudspeaker measurements....what's wrong with an anechoic chamber at home......
I've also been criticised for buying what's 'adequate' rather than what's excellent, but what gets missed is that what I consider adequate may be their excellent, or indeed vice versa.
As very little in the way of HiFi electronics isn't transparent these days, I don't see the problem with buying on facilities required and perceived build quality.
S
I wish I was as utilitarian, but I'm not.
Joining this forum (always easier to blame someone else) encouraged me to buy the first bit of new kit I've bought for maybe 15 years.
I bought the JDS Labs Atom, purely on the specifications kindly supplied by amirm. I was curios to see if a state of the art product (I know it's cheap and plastic but it's measured performance is excellent and comparable to any hi end headphone amp I've read specifications on) sounded any different to my current tube driven effects box. I was able to make an informed choice thanks to amirm's measurements.
Out of curiosity I scoured the internet for reviews. Interesting to read there were a number of reviewers who while stating that it was a good value product, still implied that a high end (higher priced) product could be an upgrade.
. Through impatience I cancelled the order and bought the Topping DX3 Pro which was instantly available. The Atom had already been dispatched when I cancelled so now I have both.
I've been listening to all three units a lot. I can perceive an audible difference between the WAD 83 and the other two very easily and I'm a bit disturbed that I have been content to listen to what to considerable distortion for many years now. So much for any audiophile credentials.
For the first time for many years I can sit and listen and think to myself 'so this is more like what that recording is supposed to sound like'.
I wouldn't have been able to do this without amirm's work here on ASR. I'll ignore the fact that he is just costing me money and undermining my complacency.
I bought my Exposure amplifiers because I heard them in a friends system, like how they looked and had the money to spare. I've had them, with other stuff in between for over 20 years (I'm not hitting the consumer bracket very well either)
My loudspeakers are totally unsuitable for my current location, but I built them (a number of iterations now) and have got used to the sound they make.
I've tried other speakers, but I just don't have the same level of attachment and therefor, they don't sound as good, even if they are more accurate.
My complaint about ASR is amirm will insist on trying to have a life rather than measuring stuff all day.