• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

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

Snobbery in Hi-Fi is a small group in each country. Most of this group usually has a high level of expertise. Let's say there is something that is the best for the current room. My cheap but respectable stereo would sound good in that room. This group would pay a lot to get the last few percent to achieve the perfect sound if it existed.
 
As with many other goods and services, the acquisition and use of certain products is not just a functional act, it is symbolic. That symbolism implies elements of taste attached to class expectations, notions of in-group belonging, tradition upkeep or other ritual and ideal forms of identity. And yes, there is also pragmatic functionality.

For a religious service, a humble hut is as adequate as a marble temple. The difference is the symbolic value of both.
 
Westsounds said:
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.
Click to expand...

Human condition, I guess.
Same applies to many products.

Imo even Asr isn't immune to it.
Imo if we were, than an avr with multiple subs and smallish speakers would be recommended more.

As it is, all products are reviewed as standalone solution, which leads to over-emphasis in discussions on the cleanliness and signal purity of a product. Which leads to buying more expensive equipment than the human ear can discern. All ime and imo of course.
 
Westsounds said:
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.
Click to expand...
Manufacturers will always take advantage of the market it happens with every market...why audio would be different.

As for why people buy stuff that overpriced....why people pay 400 euros for a tshirt with a certain "brand"' on it?
 
Bob from Florida said:
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.
Click to expand...
Do they make guitars that promise to totally eradicate string squeak?

If so, rather than a hammer, I'd buy the whole wide world those guitars and make the world a better place ;)
 
DanielT said:
Besides, that Mark Levinson No. 360S DAC doesn't have any appealing vintage looks in my eyes. Maybe people buy it because of the brand? Or for some other unfathomable reason.

Speaking of vintage looks selling. Hasn't it gotten a little out of hand?
I don't remember if I've already brought up this example in another thread, in which case here again:
I mean for example this Pioneer SX -777 receiver from 1991-92 with 65 watts:
View attachment 477298View attachment 477299
V.S

This Pioneer SX-850 receiver from 1976-78 with 65 watts:
View attachment 477300View attachment 477301
On the test bench I guess that the SX -777 would be the better one. BUT the SX-777 doesn't have the appealing vintage looks that the SX-850 has.
An SX-850 costs ten to fifteen times as much as an SX-777. :oops: That's a bit crazy. For those interested in the prices check Hifishark.



By the way, I had an SX-777 for a while a few years ago, as an extra amp. It worked flawlessly.:)
Click to expand...
Ones vintage and looks it, the other one is tip trash. Yet as you rightly say both equally capable and the 777 is possibly a lot better and less prone to breakdown. But there was a time not too long ago, nobody wanted that dated looking silver version either. It's madness how things and values change. One of the biggest white elephants in hifi are the LS3/5A 50 year old designs now costing over 2 grand! For a pint size speaker is just bonkers. Because of heritage. Yes sure they sound good but nothing you couldn't make yourself with some basic skills.
 
sergeauckland said:
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.
Click to expand...
And of course, without Casio in music, the world of Reggae Dancehall would be a much poorer place.

Long live the Sleng Teng riddim! :)
 
Westsounds said:
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.
Click to expand...
Mostly we are old and pre-internet. Our start in hi-fi was guided by the salesmen and the magazines aka marketing brochures.

That instils a mindset that isn't so easy to break away from even when confronted with blind testing and measurements that indicate zero sonic advantages.

I agree that there's an element of snobbery, and an element of pissing contest. But mostly it's old, rich people who are stuck in their ways and have gone too far with it to turn back now. Added to which there's a big chunk of Dunning-Kruger going on.

Having said that I would not argue with anyone who spent a lot more than they needed to if it was for non-sonic reasons. Why not have 'nice things' if we can afford them? Hi-fi doesn't really impress like a flashy watch or car, I think it is mostly for personal satisfaction - pleasure of ownership and use - that we might buy an expensive bit of equipment.
 
Westsounds said:
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 there's no need to, yet there are still some who can't help themselves and are falling for it hook line and sinker.
Click to expand...
When one wants to have a good sound quality one needs to invest in speakers/headphones.
The better sounding ones usually cost more.

When someone has invested in expensive (in the eyes of the beholder) transducers they usually want 'similar quality' amplifiers/DACs/turntables/streamers/players.
Sure ... you can drive expensive speakers with a cheap class-D amp from the far east perfectly well or use some cheap DAC/amp to drive headphones.
But .... people that invested in such transducers want to use 'similar quality' electronics. It really does not matter if the cheap ones do the job equally well. They just want electronics 'in the same league'.
 
Anyone with equipment cheaper than me doesn't appreciate the finer things and anyone with equipment more expensive is a chump wasting their money. (joking)

An interesting wealth statistic (from Nick Maguilli): 20% of households have <$10k wealth, 20% have $10k-$100k, 40% have $100k-$1 million and 20% have >$1 million. Half of spending in the U.S. is attributed to that top 20%. So if you are only worth a couple hundred thousand (stuck in home equity), don't underestimate that a pretty good amount of the 'show offs' have $1 million, or $5 million or $20 million of wealth.
 
Did someone say "Rolex"?!?! My $22 Casio watch I am using while swimming when on vacation is more accurate...
I don't know if it is a matter of low self esteem or something else I am unaware of.
 
ivayvr said:
Did someone say "Rolex"?!?! My $22 Casio watch I am using while swimming when on vacation is more accurate...
I don't know if it is a matter of low self esteem or something else I am unaware of.
Click to expand...
While I don't wear a Rolex, I certainly can't wear a $22 Casio for work.
 
solderdude said:
When one wants to have a good sound quality one needs to invest in speakers/headphones.
The better sounding ones usually cost more.

When someone has invested in expensive (in the eyes of the beholder) transducers they usually want 'similar quality' amplifiers/DACs/turntables/streamers/players.
Sure ... you can drive expensive speakers with a cheap class-D amp from the far east perfectly well or use some cheap DAC/amp to drive headphones.
But .... people that invested in such transducers want to use 'similar quality' electronics. It really does not matter if the cheap ones do the job equally well. They just want electronics 'in the same league'.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And sometimes people will perceive a noticeable difference on transparent transducers for a logical reason and that becomes the best evidence you have and you have no independent blind testing evidence to contradict so you go with your personal experience. And sometimes there could be a genuine difference in certain circumstances. We just don’t have blind testing evidence for everything in ever set up to definitively conclude either way.
 
Westsounds said:
Property, as in housing or real estate.
Click to expand...
I still don’t understand, can you elaborate on this part:

Westsounds said:
there is only so much property you can look after comfortably and after that it becomes gross indulgence and showing off.
Click to expand...
Specifically, how do we define and measure “uncomfortable” and “gross indulgence” and by what (or whose) standard?

Whats’a the baseline for a comfortable level of “looking after”?

Help me understand.
 
Last edited:
There is a lot of craziness in audio and It's nothing new... I've said this several times before: This is one of the few rational-scientific audio related resources.

Arnold B. Krueger (RIP) was one of the inventors of the ABX box (for comparing hardware) and ABX tests. I once asked him (on the Hydrogenaudio forum) if he was surprised about the controversy it created... it seemed so perfectly-logical to me... He was NOT surprised. He knew "audiophiles" were nuts!
 
Westsounds said:
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.
Click to expand...
Often “overspending” gets people perceived benefits other than functionally better.

Factors like: Reliability / quality construction reputation, Warranties, resale value, and appearance

For example: there’s a plethora of monoblock Hypex NCX500 amps with the same 1200/700 power supply.

Theoretically they should all perform audibly indistinguishable from each other

I picked the Buckeye Amps. But I struggled a bit with the plain appearance.

Reputation for quality construction and responsive service won me over.
 
I often ask my self if there was an audio playback technology that would playback in your head the perfect signal from the recording. No room, no speakers/headphones compromises, no dacs, no amps no noise nothing except the original recording as it would be played in the recording studio from the original master tapes.

But you would have nothing to see,touch or display. If it would be priced reasonably Would anyone buy it? and if they would...would they look for an upgrade in the future?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom