Snake Oil Department, Top This

[SuicideSquid]

Giving the game away here. This is in response to my comment on an ad for a $25,000 amplifier on Facebook, saying "spend $1,000 on an amplifier that sounds just as good, and $24,000 on albums so you can listen to music and support artists".

It's not about enjoying music, it's about fetishizing gear and showing off.

 

[pablolie]

View attachment 486247

Giving the game away here. This is in response to my comment on an ad for a $25,000 amplifier on Facebook, saying "spend $1,000 on an amplifier that sounds just as good, and $24,000 on albums so you can listen to music and support artists".

It's not about enjoying music, it's about fetishizing gear and showing off.

While in principle a valid hypothesis, without more evidence it doesn't even qualify as a theorem - it seems a generalization without any supporting data.

Maybe a well formulated, neutral poll in several audio forums asking people about how much they spend on equipment vs music would provide a better foundation for a discussion.

Don't get me wrong, we all have witnessed posts that seem to put equipment first and music second. But there are also many posts on this website that show great passion in all music styles. So I am not sure things are as unbalanced as the claim above.

On latest count, I own over 4,200 albums of music I have ripped into my current library and kept. That's probably a 60k investment in albums, at minimum. And I know I am not even in the top 10% (I learned that in the Lyrion forums, which are quite technical yet full of passion for music). In fact, I haven't bought a single piece of equipment [1]... zilch nada... in at least 6 years. My expenditure since has been exclusively on new music. I'd estimate 2-3 albums a month (very conservative) plus my Spotify Premium monthly subscription. And heck no, I don't pirate - I want my fav artists to make the $ they deserve.

And I dispute the premise that *every* person that overspends on equipment doesn't really spend much on music. There are indeed some clear cases thereof (come listen to my 200k system and let's listen to reference album platitudes), I know of far more exceptions to that rule.

[1] When it comes to main system. My home work station music system I did upgrade with a 10+ year old DAC and HP to a JDS Element 3 and Beyerdynamic DT1990pro about 2 or 3 years ago... peanuts compared to other office systems in here.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I dispute the premise that *every* person that overspends on equipment doesn't really spend much on music

Where was this premise? I must have missed it. What I saw was an insight that people who spend much more on gear than on music care more about gear than music. Makes sense to me, and given the sorry state of music finance today it's a sad realization.

 

[pablolie]

Where was this premise? I must have missed it. What I saw was an insight that people who spend much more on gear than on music care more about gear than music. Makes sense to me, and given the sorry state of music finance today it's a sad realization.

I was replying to the premise that when you spend money on gear, "It's not about enjoying music, it's about fetishizing gear and showing off." - which I am NOT attacking because we all know that it's something that happens, but I dispute it can be generalized.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

I was replying to the premise that when you spend money on gear, "It's not about enjoying music, it's about fetishizing gear and showing off." - which I am NOT attacking because we all know that it's something that happens, but I dispute it can be generalized.

The post didn't say anything about "everyone" and in context your reply is #NotAllAudiophiles

 

[pablolie]

The post didn't say anything about "everyone" and in context your reply is #NotAllAudiophiles

Well you're making my point, thanks. Not *all* audiophiles indeed.

 

[SuicideSquid]

weirdly the buckeye looks coolest to me, out of those three

I have a Buckeye. It's awesome, I love it, it doesn't look good. It's just... there. Definitely prefer the Benchmark (but not the Krell, which looks gaudy)

 

[SuicideSquid]

I was replying to the premise that when you spend money on gear, "It's not about enjoying music, it's about fetishizing gear and showing off." - which I am NOT attacking because we all know that it's something that happens, but I dispute it can be generalized.

I wasn't talking about any spending on gear, obviously.

The specific example was someone drooling over $25,000 gear and calling me an idiot for saying you should spend that much on music. If you've got a great system that you invested $25k in and you've got a 2,000 or 5,000-album record collection, awesome. If you're dumping tens or hundreds of thousands into your gear and you're not spending money on albums and supporting artists, you're not a music fan, you're a gear fetishist.

Related, the local "audiophile" stereo shop, which has been around for decades, tells customers, and has for years, that if they buy their big music server they sell, they'll load it up with 10,000 albums, free of charge. I cannot tell you how contemptible I think that is. I wasn't a regular there but I've never set foot in the place since learning that, and a pox on every person who took them up on that "deal".

 

[RexrothPigeon]

the local "audiophile" stereo shop, which has been around for decades, tells customers, and has for years, that if they buy their big music server they sell, they'll load it up with 10,000 albums, free of charge.

Disgusting, exploitative behavior. Contemptible is right.

 

[pablolie]

Disgusting, exploitative behavior. Contemptible is right.

Completely illegal and they should be shut down for that.

 

[Mnyb]

Related, the local "audiophile" stereo shop, which has been around for decades, tells customers, and has for years, that if they buy their big music server they sell, they'll load it up with 10,000 albums, free of charge. I cannot tell you how contemptible I think that is. I wasn't a regular there but I've never set foot in the place since learning that, and a pox on every person who took them up on that "deal".

Can they be reported ? It's another level than having bad judgement one day and downloaded something in the past , they are practically selling illegal downloads as they are bundled with a product

 

[mhardy6647]

I have a Buckye... it doesn't look good. It's just... there.

Sounds like me...

 

[rdenney]

I have a Buckeye. It's awesome, I love it, it doesn't look good. It's just... there. Definitely prefer the Benchmark (but not the Krell, which looks gaudy)

The photo of the Krell is gaudy, but in the same lighting as the others it would look the part of a well-made, high-end, high-power amp, while the Benchmark would look the part of a quality commercial amp and the Buckeye would look like a brick power supply for something else

There are much gaudier amps out there and many of them cost much more than the Krell, of course.

Rick "whose Buckeye amp is not on display, but is located where the flashing of the clip indicators will be visible" Denney

 

[rdenney]

Can they be reported ? It's another level than having bad judgement one day and downloaded something in the past , they are practically selling illegal downloads as they are bundled with a product

Report them to the music licensing companies. Copyrights are both civil and criminal, but in practice, nothing happens with copyright until the aggrieved party brings suit.

(I would think it would be easier to provide the customer with a prepaid life membership in a streaming platform.)

Rick "unless, of course, that loaded streamer costs $100K because the store has made a licensing deal with ASCAP and SESAC" Denney

 

[SuicideSquid]

Can they be reported ? It's another level than having bad judgement one day and downloaded something in the past , they are practically selling illegal downloads as they are bundled with a product

In Canada. Zero enforcement. No point.

 

[Doodski]

In Canada. Zero enforcement. No point.

Yes, all true. My understanding is the judges position is music files are not protected and movies are kinda protected.

 

[SuicideSquid]

Yes, all true. My understanding is the judges position is music files are not protected and movies are kinda protected.

It's not that they're not protected, they absolutely are (lawyer and musician speaking, not legal advice, etc.), it's that there are almost no mechanisms for enforcement.

For people who download stolen material from torrent sites, or for the torrent sites themselves, copyright holders can send a notice of copyright violation but there's nothing else they can do - there's no mechanism to force hosts to remove the offending material and bringing a damages claim is very difficult. In theory there are a few more options in place for going after a company like this that's selling a device loaded with stolen material, but in practice the way the system is set up makes it virtually impossible unless you're selling like, thousands or tens of thousands of units rather than one or two a month.

 

[MarkHH]

Rick "interior designers need to eat, too, as do the former workers in the Krell factory in Connecticut" Denney

I almost always have to laugh when reading this ‘Rick “who has the coolest and longest middle initial” Denney’ stuff.

 

[kemmler3D]

It all starts with the mistaken belief in the absolute validity of their sensual perception and the invalidity or insufficiency of measurements. A curt but correct "digital cables cannot have a sound because that's not how any of this works" then appears as a refusal to engage with what they consider to be their arguments, and as rigidly believing in something they consider constantly disproven in their own experience. They think we are the idiots and lunatics.

You've hit the nail on the head here.

And you know what, in those situations where audibility is categorically impossible, maybe I am smug. In the same way that a car enthusiast would be smug telling another car enthusiast that the bobblehead on the dashboard does not make the car go faster.

You can only feel smugness or pity in those situations, but they deal a lot of smugness and condescension of their own, so pity typically gets pushed out.

 

[kemmler3D]

It's not that they're not protected, they absolutely are (lawyer and musician speaking, not legal advice, etc.), it's that there are almost no mechanisms for enforcement.

For people who download stolen material from torrent sites, or for the torrent sites themselves, copyright holders can send a notice of copyright violation but there's nothing else they can do - there's no mechanism to force hosts to remove the offending material and bringing a damages claim is very difficult. In theory there are a few more options in place for going after a company like this that's selling a device loaded with stolen material, but in practice the way the system is set up makes it virtually impossible unless you're selling like, thousands or tens of thousands of units rather than one or two a month.

I dunno, really? In the US this could be considered criminal copyright infringement with possible jail time. Downloading is one thing, selling pirated media is a horse of a very different colour. Especially given how many albums they're selling per customer...