I'm not entirely sure when it was that I bought my first Hi-fi magazine but I think it must have been about 1989
I already had a system bought from Richer Sounds and was looking to upgrade so I got a copy of What Hi-Fi (AKA 'WTF?') in the hope of getting some guidance.
(I didn't and in the end I randomly bought some giant speakers from the 8 page 'Hyper-Fi' advert in the middle of the magazine, but that's a different story).
I carried on buying magazines, mostly Hi-Fi Review, Choice, Hi-Fi World up until about 2014 when I realised it was an expensive way to just read one speaker review and skip past all the cable reviews and adverts.
Now in 1989 I was a youth of twenty and knew nothing about pretty much everything. I'm not sure when I had the realisation that the magazines were not intended to serve the potential customer with useful consumer advice, but to serve the hi-fi industry by ensuring a constant supply of punters, but I suspect to my chagrin that I was in my late thirties when the penny dropped.
Now of course it is all on-line but the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Take, for example, this fairly brief article from Enjoy The Music (dot com) - https://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazi...The_Future.htm
It's a great example of just why these sites are not a good source of impartial advice
The topic is essentially the age-old editorial about how 'The Industry Is Dying.' Well they used to do articles about this back in the 1980s. Like Hyman Roth in 'Godfather II' the hi-fi industry has been dying from the same heart-attack for the last forty years.
The writer is concerned that the rise in interest rates will mean young people won't have the money to move out of their parents house and into their own house, and so will never graduate from using smartphones and headphones as their source for listening to music. No more customers for the 'High-end'.
Oh dear, how sad. So what?
Well he tackles that question and it's quite revealing:
''Simple: Audiophiles and members of the industry that serves us (count me on both sides here) have long been concerned about the fate of our hobby.''
Okay so back up a minute. The hi-fi 'industry' exists to serve us? That's funny, I thought that, like any company, a hi-fi company's purpose is to make money for their shareholders.
Of course he knows that, he just doesn't want us to think that.
We (or at least a good many of us) therefore thought "Aha! Every kid has a cellphone; every kid loves music; every kid will get "get into" good sound through his cell phone; and at least a majority of those kids will go on to wanting good sound at home. Voila! A new "us" and an ongoing market for our industry.
Again 'Our industry'. Whose industry now? I make a living in the motor trade, mate, hi-fi isn't 'my' industry nor is it likely to be the industry of 99.999 percent of the people reading your article, given it's an industry that employs comparatively few people. You've got problems finding punters for expensive tat, talk to your marketing department, it's nothing to do with us.
So yes, he's worried that in 10 years or whatever there'll be no-one interested in spending big money on hi-fi. The usual story we've been hearing for half a century. Why is it this time?
''not only do younger people tend to have less money than older ones, but they also tend to live in different places: Depending on their age, they may still be living "at home", with their parents. Or they may be in school, grad school, or working at whatever kind of job. Whatever their circumstances, though, it's likely that they're not going to be living in their own house, but in a room or an apartment, not only limited in space to set up a system or a listening room, but also subject to restrictions on how loud and when they can play their music.''
But wait a minute! I had the box room at my parent's house, tiny room, still had a hi-fi system in there. Then went to University and lived in a little breeze-block cell for three years - still had a hifi system in there. Then to a box room in a shared house - still had a hi-fi system there too, with big speakers. Err.. the trick is just not to play it so loud.
And as for money - I was as poor as a church mouse but you could always get discounted bin-end kit and second hand kit if you wanted a change or an upgrade on a tight budget. And I still managed to get a mortgage somehow anyway.
Really I'm fed up with reading about things being difficult financially for young people. It was always that way unless your parents were loaded.
What he's really worried about is that these youngsters are never going to be in a position to buy expensive hi-fi. Because that's where the big margins are.
Well you can't blame them for trying I suppose. But how about making some good affordable products and writing about them? Or writing about second-hand bargains instead of reviews of ten grand streamers, cables and other expensive, magic-powered nonsense that surely has the effect of putting off impecunious youngsters looking at getting into the hobby?
Industry Insiders Bollocks. Self-serving and - ultimately - counter-productive.
I already had a system bought from Richer Sounds and was looking to upgrade so I got a copy of What Hi-Fi (AKA 'WTF?') in the hope of getting some guidance.
(I didn't and in the end I randomly bought some giant speakers from the 8 page 'Hyper-Fi' advert in the middle of the magazine, but that's a different story).
I carried on buying magazines, mostly Hi-Fi Review, Choice, Hi-Fi World up until about 2014 when I realised it was an expensive way to just read one speaker review and skip past all the cable reviews and adverts.
Now in 1989 I was a youth of twenty and knew nothing about pretty much everything. I'm not sure when I had the realisation that the magazines were not intended to serve the potential customer with useful consumer advice, but to serve the hi-fi industry by ensuring a constant supply of punters, but I suspect to my chagrin that I was in my late thirties when the penny dropped.
Now of course it is all on-line but the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Take, for example, this fairly brief article from Enjoy The Music (dot com) - https://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazi...The_Future.htm
It's a great example of just why these sites are not a good source of impartial advice
The topic is essentially the age-old editorial about how 'The Industry Is Dying.' Well they used to do articles about this back in the 1980s. Like Hyman Roth in 'Godfather II' the hi-fi industry has been dying from the same heart-attack for the last forty years.
The writer is concerned that the rise in interest rates will mean young people won't have the money to move out of their parents house and into their own house, and so will never graduate from using smartphones and headphones as their source for listening to music. No more customers for the 'High-end'.
Oh dear, how sad. So what?
Well he tackles that question and it's quite revealing:
''Simple: Audiophiles and members of the industry that serves us (count me on both sides here) have long been concerned about the fate of our hobby.''
Okay so back up a minute. The hi-fi 'industry' exists to serve us? That's funny, I thought that, like any company, a hi-fi company's purpose is to make money for their shareholders.
Of course he knows that, he just doesn't want us to think that.
We (or at least a good many of us) therefore thought "Aha! Every kid has a cellphone; every kid loves music; every kid will get "get into" good sound through his cell phone; and at least a majority of those kids will go on to wanting good sound at home. Voila! A new "us" and an ongoing market for our industry.
Again 'Our industry'. Whose industry now? I make a living in the motor trade, mate, hi-fi isn't 'my' industry nor is it likely to be the industry of 99.999 percent of the people reading your article, given it's an industry that employs comparatively few people. You've got problems finding punters for expensive tat, talk to your marketing department, it's nothing to do with us.
So yes, he's worried that in 10 years or whatever there'll be no-one interested in spending big money on hi-fi. The usual story we've been hearing for half a century. Why is it this time?
''not only do younger people tend to have less money than older ones, but they also tend to live in different places: Depending on their age, they may still be living "at home", with their parents. Or they may be in school, grad school, or working at whatever kind of job. Whatever their circumstances, though, it's likely that they're not going to be living in their own house, but in a room or an apartment, not only limited in space to set up a system or a listening room, but also subject to restrictions on how loud and when they can play their music.''
But wait a minute! I had the box room at my parent's house, tiny room, still had a hi-fi system in there. Then went to University and lived in a little breeze-block cell for three years - still had a hifi system in there. Then to a box room in a shared house - still had a hi-fi system there too, with big speakers. Err.. the trick is just not to play it so loud.
And as for money - I was as poor as a church mouse but you could always get discounted bin-end kit and second hand kit if you wanted a change or an upgrade on a tight budget. And I still managed to get a mortgage somehow anyway.
Really I'm fed up with reading about things being difficult financially for young people. It was always that way unless your parents were loaded.
What he's really worried about is that these youngsters are never going to be in a position to buy expensive hi-fi. Because that's where the big margins are.
Well you can't blame them for trying I suppose. But how about making some good affordable products and writing about them? Or writing about second-hand bargains instead of reviews of ten grand streamers, cables and other expensive, magic-powered nonsense that surely has the effect of putting off impecunious youngsters looking at getting into the hobby?
Industry Insiders Bollocks. Self-serving and - ultimately - counter-productive.
Last edited:
