watchnerd
Grand Contributor
A goal I whole heartedly support!
Right. But your claim seemed to be that the motivation was not about getting the sound the person wanted, but rather some OTHER factor like "feeling good about themselves."
Then I suggest that is a poor thesis. Or at least poorly formed.
What do you mean by "sound better?" What's your criteria?
The MBL speakers being omnis have a particular sonic characteristic of very open, boxless, detailed and spacious imaging/soundstaging.
If someone is looking for that type of sound, who are you to say it doesn't "sound better" than a speaker YOU like? You could appeal to ways that, for instance, it measures differently than a speaker you like, but if it produces a sound of the type someone is looking for, then it is "better" for that person's taste and criteria.
But since speakers do sound different, and if the presentation of the MBLs is what someone is looking for, then it DOES "sound better" from that person's criteria. I don't see any reason to just grant your premise that the MBLs won't "sound better" as it seems based on some as-yet-unargued for value scheme or criteria (and which you will also have to argue for).
Not quite the same as there may not be sonic differences between most DACs and competently designed cables, so that's another ball of wax. But different speaker designs do sound different, and hence someone's personal preferences plausibly come in to play.
If you buy an expensive sports car should I be telling you that's a waste of money beccause you can get from A to B cheaper? Or...do we allow that people have different tastes, goals, which can make their decisions quite rational in fulfilling those desires?
I don't follow. How does it follow that someone buying A expensive audio gear makes it about "feeling better about himself" than someone buying "B" expensive audio gear.
Many on this forum have bought and own audio gear that is VERY EXPENSIVE and looks extravegant from a non-audiophile's perspective. Do you think everyone's motivation is "to feel better about himself?" If yes, then I don't see the particular point you'd be making about someone buying on expensive item over another. In other words, no need to pick on someone buying a really expensive set of speakers in particular.
But, if it isn't everyone's motivation to "feel good about himself" in making an audio purchase, I don't see how you actually have grounds to make the exception you want to make for a more expensive speaker purchase.
(I just spent the most money I've ever put out for a pair of speakers. They are by any normal joe's viewpoint, extravagent. Did I do it to "make me feel better about myself?" Sorry, I don't recognize that motivation. I wanted a particular aesthetic and especially the particular sound of this speaker which really pushed my buttons. I don't recognize feeling "better about myself" before or after the purchase.)
Sure. Agreed. But that didn't seem to be your point. I was only arguing against the claim about the psychology of someone buying really expensive speakers (e.g. $100,000) being based on "how it makes them feel about themselves" as if the main motivation were not in fact "chasing better sound and buying the speakers on those grounds." As I suggest: most audiophiles buy for similar reasons: they like audio gear, and look to have systems with (to them) great sound. And their spending scales with their income.
Since this will all vary a lot by individual, why not just lump it all under the term "utility" like economists do and call it a day?