Snobbery in Hi-Fi. Why are people so stupid and turn their noses up at gear costing much less which is just as good?

[Westsounds]

Badge snobs, the bias influenced, why are these people so blind to see there is nothing mystic about hifi, great sound is basically achievable at much lower costs than they are prepared to completely shell out for. Yet they still get hoodwinked by brands, kudos and status associated with equipment. The upgrade myth is still a thing. Good gear is good gear regardless of age, price or branding.

I get we all like different things and often different effects from equipment is what we are individually looking for, but manufacturers really take advantage I feel. And now with more and more well designed equipment available at lower prices than its ever been theres no need to, yet there are still some who can't help themselves and are falling for it hook line and sinker.

 

[sergeauckland]

When I've been asked by friends about HiFi equipment, and I suggest something, I've often had the reply that 'My budget is higher than that'...

S.

 

[Westsounds]

When I've been asked by friends about HiFi equipment, and I suggest something, I've often had the reply that 'My budget is higher than that'...

S.

I know, it's completely insane. It goes well beyond 'good sound' and well designed equipment into the psychological realm. But it's an illness as well I feel. And to put a derogatory label on it's just pure snobbery. There really is no need of it. It often becomes this P***ing contest and a fools glory.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Audio equipment is not unique in this respect. Substitute "cars, motorcycles, houses, guitars, etc" and you will find plenty of more "costly" solutions that the purchasers "swear by". It's a "human condition" to outdo the "Neighbors". As long as you don't get "carried away" and it becomes an "addiction"....

 

[Andrew s]

You pays your money and takes your choice. It's not just only about the sound but personal aesthetics and self image.

Years ago I bought an amp recommend by @sergeauckland but the uv meters drove me mad and spoiled my listening experience. I replaced it with Benchmark pre and power amp. Overkill ? Almost certainly but I just enjoy using them.

Regards Andrew

 

[Westsounds]

Audio equipment is not unique in this respect. Substitute "cars, motorcycles, houses, guitars, etc" and you will find plenty of more "costly" solutions that the purchasers "swear by". It's a "human condition" to outdo the "Neighbors". As long as you don't get "carried away" and it becomes an "addiction"....

I know this too well Bob, as a hobbyist guitarist who’s done lots with it over the years, I too, felt like I needed the best and squinted while listening to equipment and compared guitars/amps/effects. That is no different from Hi-Fi, yet the term ‘tone’ is thrown about over there which means completely nothing because everything has it’s own sound. And doing it with guitars and guitar amplifiers is even more preposterous because these are low-fi instruments, they are not even capable of the extreme frequencies that good Hi-Fi gets you to. It’s a complete swindle and yet the next best product comes out or the next custom shop guitar People saying guitars from the 50s or 60s sound better and have a ‘tone’ and yes sure they’ll have variation but it's old gear. But actually a well-designed Stratocaster from any decade will pretty much sound identical through the same amplifier, given that all the pick-ups etc are of equal output. That is one instrument that is pretty linear in sound given the many factors are the same, they just have a sound, whether you pay £100 or £10,000. Definitely a sector in the snob brigade again.

 

[TTT15]

I agree budget it an element. They buy off their budget. Most people don’t buy consumer goods off specs. They buy off price, brand, appearance, marketing, design, customer service. and features.

The subjective content is better presented and they communicate better and is friendly. A lot of objective content is not presented so slickly and comes across as hostile, aggressive, critical and unfriendly. This is not a good way to persuade other people and there is no point being right if you can’t persuade other people.

Finally though WiiM and Eversolo are making a lot of headway but that is because they are not just focusing on specs but the other factors above that drive purchasing decisions.

If objectivists want to be more persuasive then provide more blind test evidence and more importantly be nice because then you will have more chance of persuading other people.

 

[boxerfan88]

Casio vs. Patek Philippe
Toyota Corolla vs. Lexus IS
SMSL D400 vs. Esoteric N-05XD

Nothing inherently right or wrong choosing either side. Not sure why some people are given the label "stupid"?

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Veblen good - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Westsounds]

Casio vs. Patek Philippe
Toyota Corolla vs. Lexus IS
SMSL D400 vs. Esoteric N-05XD

Nothing inherently right or wrong choosing either side. Not sure why some people are given the label "stupid"?

Well ok labels are not always nice I’ll give you that. And people's choice is just that. But when they are not really gaining anything other than in their own perception it’s kind of stupid, because people are overspending when there is no need to. The money could be put to better use for instance. But it’s their money I suppose, but if we are talking about making change for the general population better, which I believe this forum does, why not at least discuss it. If a label like stupid is put out there to do it so be it.

 

[TTT15]

I completely agree that the world would be a better place if people made decisions and formed views more objectively based on evidence.

However, all the objective evidence is that calling people stupids,idiots and fools and being hostile and aggressive is not the best way to persuade other people. Studies have shown that the best tactic is not to disagree but really listen, provide evidence and be nice.

The subjectivist content is more popular because presentation matters more than the content and they are better at it. Humans are subjective so you won’t persuade them on an objective level if you can’t persuade them on a subjective level.

The people who persuade me are honest,friendly, polite, provide evidence, listen, and admit they don’t know everything, no one does, and admits there are very few absolutes if any when it comes to the subjective decisions of consumer purchases.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

But when they are not really gaining anything other than in their own perception it’s kind of stupid, because people are overspending when there is no need to.

Perhaps you are too cynical. In some cases they are being misled or deceived, of course, but in other cases they are getting some non-audio satisfaction, whether that be based on appearance, bragging rights, community, or something else. And "overspending" is completely context-dependent: what $1k or $10k or $100k or $1m means to one person is not necessarily what it means to another person.

 

[Westsounds]

I completely agree that the world would be a better place if people made decisions and formed views more objectively based on evidence.

However, all the objective evidence is that calling people stupids,idiots and fools and being hostile and aggressive is not the best way to persuade other people. Studies have shown that the best tactic is not to disagree but really listen, provide evidence and be nice.

The subjectivist content is more popular because presentation matters more than the content and they are better at it. Humans are subjective so you won’t persuade them on an objective level if you can’t persuade them on a subjective level.

The people who persuade me are honest,friendly, polite, provide evidence, listen, and admit they don’t know everything, no one does, and admits there are very few absolutes if any when it comes to the subjective decisions of consumer purchases.

I should be safe here as I’m not and wouldn’t say that directly to someone who is of that disposition. But I am on a forum which encourages people to make decisions based on scientific evidence rather than subjective nonsense.

It does baffle my brain though when people just don’t get it. I met someone with a very impressive system once, yet his amplifier was used to design a speaker I had at the time. He already had some very impressive high cost speakers, yet I said to them about the speakers I had. I said you're welcome to just try them, but oh no, they didn’t want to downgrade, even though these speakers were designed around that exact amplifier. Their next move was to spend even more money on more expensive speakers that they were upgrading to on this infinite path of spending improvement. And they were having fun doing it, it seemed. So I just said great, all the best.

Absolutes are just as you say though, very few, if any when it comes to consumer electronics.

 

[Westsounds]

Perhaps you are too cynical. In some cases they are being misled or deceived, of course, but in other cases they are getting some non-audio satisfaction, whether that be based on appearance, bragging rights, community, or something else. And "overspending" is completely context-dependent: what $1k or $10k or $100k or $1m means to one person is not necessarily what it means to another person.

Very reasonable to think this. I agree.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I know this too well Bob, as a hobbyist guitarist who’s done lots with it over the years, I too, felt like I needed the best and squinted while listening to equipment and compared guitars/amps/effects. That is no different from Hi-Fi, yet the term ‘tone’ is thrown about over there which means completely nothing because everything has it’s own sound. And doing it with guitars and guitar amplifiers is even more preposterous because these are low-fi instruments, they are not even capable of the extreme frequencies that good Hi-Fi gets you to. It’s a complete swindle and yet the next best product comes out or the next custom shop guitar People saying guitars from the 50s or 60s sound better and have a ‘tone’ and yes sure they’ll have variation but it's old gear. But actually a well-designed Stratocaster from any decade will pretty much sound identical through the same amplifier, given that all the pick-ups etc are of equal output. That is one instrument that is pretty linear in sound given the many factors are the same, they just have a sound, whether you pay £100 or £10,000. Definitely a sector in the snob brigade again.

You get the Signature guitar you always wanted and then discover you can’t make it sound like the Artist did because you don’t “roll” your fingers on the strings the same way. No amount of building “patches” on your processor hits that “sound”. Then you realize it’s makes more sense to get a guitar that is “playable” and looks nice but not so “nice” you fear putting a mark on it! I have 5 guitars, which is at least 3 more than needed, especially at my skill level. However, it does make me happy to strum them.

 

[sergeauckland]

Casio vs. Patek Philippe
Toyota Corolla vs. Lexus IS
SMSL D400 vs. Esoteric N-05XD

Nothing inherently right or wrong choosing either side. Not sure why some people are given the label "stupid"?

However, in the case of the Casio, it's actually better at its primary function, that of telling the time, than the more expensive Patek Philippe.

Unless of course, the primary function of a watch is to impress...

S.

 

[DanielT]

Badge snobs, the bias influenced, why are these people so blind to see there is nothing mystic about hifi, great sound is basically achievable at much lower costs than they are prepared to completely shell out for. Yet they still get hoodwinked by brands, kudos and status associated with equipment. The upgrade myth is still a thing. Good gear is good gear regardless of age, price or branding.

I get we all like different things and often different effects from equipment is what we are individually looking for, but manufacturers really take advantage I feel. And now with more and more well designed equipment available at lower prices than its ever been theres no need to, yet there are still some who can't help themselves and are falling for it hook line and sinker.

Yet they still get hoodwinked by brands, kudos and status associated with equipment...and vintage.
Vintage amps/receivers are said to have a "softer, more musical sound" and so on. Vintage because it's nice to look at, I understand, but not because of its performance, which in many cases is of course worse than newer stuff. With that said, there are, for example, good transparent vintage amps, but still.
They can be expensive as hell, though. BUT , they can retain or even increase in value. If they are maintained, serviced and so on.
(I know I'm asking and answering my own questions, I apologize for that)

Then we have tube amps. Often extremely expensive watts. Nice with tube glow, though.
Not to mention how reviewers are praising tube amps to the skies. Tube amp snobbery.

Spoiler: Some randomly taken tube amp reviews

I haven't seen them but I dare bet a month's salary that they will sing the praises of the soft, nice midrange sound, the incredible soundstage they create. The usual generic thing you hear in such tube amp reviews. Maybe they are crappy tube amps that create a wanky FR together with audible distortion which is the cause. Or they are fooling themselves and imagine hearing this nice sound.
They can also make money singing praises, but I'll leave that aspect aside.

By the way, wanky FR and audible distortion can be fixed with free EQ and free distortion plug ins.

Tube amps as a hobby, as DIY, and or to keep vintage (tube) hi-fi technology alive, however. I understand that and it makes sense like any other hobby.
Like:

'Does anyone have a Williamson tube amplifier?'

Apr 7, 2023

Or have had, listened to a Williamson tube amplifier? Impression?

Are they available?
What can one, in reasonable condition, cost?

I could really imagine having one. Mostly for its HiFi history. Not as a main amp but in some nice secondary system. Then together with a subwoofer + LP/HP filter sub-speaker. Speakers that the Williamson tube amplifier would like to drive.
I might add that when I say have such an old amplifier as a general tip, you should be knowledgeable about electronics or, as in my case, have a friend who is knowledgeable (I help him with other things). Taking...

• DanielT
• Replies: 72
• Forum: Amplifiers, Phono preamp, and Analog Audio Review

• 

 

[Cogito]

When I've been asked by friends about HiFi equipment, and I suggest something, I've often had the reply that 'My budget is higher than that'...

S.

I don't have any friends into Hi-Fi that I can talk shop to, and the friends I have, don't understand why I've invested so much money into my hobby.

 

[KenMasters]

...And "overspending" is completely context-dependent: what $1k or $10k or $100k or $1m means to one person is not necessarily what it means to another person.

Very true, and can slice any number of ways.

I generally don't concern myself over what people choose to do with their money, though I find it interesting to see how differently people choose to allocate their funds.

I say generally because most of the time it's a no harm, no foul situation, but I did once come across the home of an audiophile I found disturbing.

We talk about the snake oil peddlers and the people that buy into this stuff jokingly most of the time, but to see it in full effect is to see a kind of madness. At that point I don't think there is a rationale behind the allocation of funds (or the system itself for that matter).

An extreme example, but it has brought me a new perspective on some of the online discourse around audio.

 

[Keith_W]

The world of audiophilia has changed a lot in the last 75 years.

Audiophiles of the previous generation were a lot more technical. Enthusiasts would read magazines with circuit diagrams and then go off and construct their own amps and speakers. McIntosh was not a luxury audio brand like it is today, it catered to "average" audio enthusiasts.

However, as technology progressed, something seemed to change. New innovations often had teething problems, e.g. early transistor amps had poor thermal stability, low power output, poor HF response, and poor reliability. This lead to them developing a reputation that took at least a couple of decades to shake off. Early CD players sounded bright and harsh because of poor mastering, not to mention early digital technology had ineffective oversampling, higher noise floor, and more jitter. This again lead to them developing a reputation for "digital sound" which persists even today.

Along the way, the market became a lot more conservative. They learnt to be suspicious of innovations and they stuck to tube amps and vinyl. In some cases, they were right - some innovations came and went (SACD, MQA, MiniDisc, DAT, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD).

But what also changed was that they started to distrust measurements and specifications. THIS is the biggest difference between the vast majority of modern audiophiles and us on ASR, and the older generation. Audio is no longer about good measurements, since "measurements don't tell you anything about how it sounds". And once you throw measurements and objectivity out the window, you open the door to all sorts of snake oil. Audio is viewed as an activity akin to watch appreciation, fountain pen collecting, and wine tasting.

For us, audio equipment is functional. For them, it's about craftsmanship, pride of ownership, etc. Which would be fine, if they were honest about it. Nothing wrong with exotic speaker cables or cable elevators - they look nice (IMO anyway!). But what IS wrong are the claims of superior performance and the outrageous prices. I would happily pay a bit more for a nice looking cable. But not 100x more.