Spending big bucks on HiFi Audio

[D2013]

Where and when are people being judged poorly for spending a lot of money on hobbies / luxuries?

I've seen people get pissy about expensive hobby/interest purchases several times before. The hostility wasn't about the item purchased, it was about not being able to spend similar amounts of money on things they wanted.

It's nothing more than old school biblical jealousy!

 

[Sonic icons]

From a utilitarian perspective, hi fi is way too small in aggregate expenditure to be criticized. I’m sure there are innumerable examples of vastly larger categories of spend and resource utilization that are far more wasteful. Imagine all the excess cotton t shirts the world produces each year and how those dollar, water and land resources could be reallocated to more productive use. the world’s richest person at times has been chairman of LVMH, owner of many luxury goods grands. That’s cool with me but I also see as evidence of very poor decision making, and resource allocation and distribution by humans. But i enjoy reading Veblen, Mencken and their modern counterparts and luxury goods make for entertaining satire of human failings.

From a report "Fast Fashion and its Environmental Impact in 2024",

According to an analysis by Business Insider, fashion production comprises 10% of total global carbon emissions, as much as the European Union. It dries up water sources and pollutes rivers and streams, while 85% of all textiles go to dumps each year.

I don't think there are any audiophiles / audio enthusiasts who throw 85% by weight of their existing gear in the trash each year, so we're way ahead of the fashion industry (which is much larger because it appeals to a larger percentage of the world population) in environmental awareness.

 

[kemmler3D]

From a report "Fast Fashion and its Environmental Impact in 2024",



I don't think there are any audiophiles / audio enthusiasts who throw 85% by weight of their existing gear in the trash each year, so we're way ahead of the fashion industry (which is much larger because it appeals to a larger percentage of the world population) in environmental awareness.

The point made here is fine, but people aren't throwing away 85% of their clothes every year, the industry itself discards a lot of unsold items (this is a pretty harrowing story about it) and there's some waste involved with making clothes in the first place.

 

[Sonic icons]

I think a big divide comes from what people think it should cost. For instance, show a couple people a picture of the Focal Grande Utopia EM Evo and I’d wager most people won’t guess over $5k despite it retailing for $280k.

I had to check to remind myself of what that looks like, and I say well worth the price for those who can afford it - especially the "in your face" factor if the owner can arrange for it to be viewed by professional or social rivals. Gives the impression it's going to come to life any moment and start talking to its owner about upgrade paths. The best colors are forest green or electric blue, best placement near a large picture window.

Even going more realistic and sane, if you show them a Revel F208 they’ll probably guess around $700 and not $4000.

People don’t have exposure to audio product prices, they have a giant exposure to car prices.

Switching to discussion of these more mundanely priced components, it occurred to me that most people, if shown a F36 (currently on sale for $600 ea) and F206, wouldn't be able to guess which is more expensive. An audio enthusiast not already familiar with the models might notice two "tells" on the F206 - the medium sized driver between the little one and the big ones, implying a 3-way crossover, and the curved cabinet shape (higher manufacturing cost).

 

[Sonic icons]

The point made here is fine, but people aren't throwing away 85% of their clothes every year, the industry itself discards a lot of unsold items (this is a pretty harrowing story about it) and there's some waste involved with making clothes in the first place.

I don't doubt that, but the total waste of resources from an environmental point of view is due to the sum of actions by industry and consumers - and very concept of "fast fashion" indicates that the industry is selling the idea to consumers "you should replace your clothes more frequently to achieve a look that's ahead of the curve".

 

[kemmler3D]

I don't doubt that, but the total waste of resources from an environmental point of view is due to the sum of actions by industry and consumers - and very concept of "fast fashion" indicates that the industry is selling the idea to consumers "you should replace your clothes more frequently to achieve a look that's ahead of the curve".

Definitely agree. Unfortunately people are conditioned to expect large amounts of low-quality clothing at absurdly low prices instead of buying a quality item at 5x the price.

I'll also take a moment to quickly plug buying your gear secondhand to extend the useful life of things and slow down pollution and consumption of raw materials.

 

[Sonic icons]

Audio is a hobby but listening to music is more than a hobby. Music is like air or sunshine to me. Over five decades I've spent thousands on equipment, perhaps as much as the cost of a new Honda Accord in total. That was only one-half the expense. How much have I spent on LP's and Cd's I wonder. Do many of you, like me, enjoy looking for used CD's at thrift stores and stores that stock and sell used media? At $16 per CD I won't take a risk on an unknown artist or music from an obscure part of the world, but for a few $'s I often do, and I have been rewarded doing that. How many LP's and CD's have I owned and played over the years? Maybe 500 LP's or more, and 1,500 Cd's. The cost isn't much if you think of music as being akin to food. It nurishes us. Maybe playing with the equipment does too. And it is play. I won't but I could write about getting the Thorens set up right, and the experience of first listening to memorable records (record is a term for LP which is a specific memory bank on an old-timer).

I've noticed that a current trend in the classical music world is imperiling the living space and maybe the sanity of collectors: releasing "complete editions", all the recordings by a given conductor, artist and/or ensemble on a given label, and enticingly priced in cost per disc. For example, on the PrestoMusic site, I see these new + best-selling releases: Sir Neville Marriner, The Complete Warner Classics Recordings, 80 CDs for only $206; Bach, The Complete Vocal Works, Bach Collegium of Japan, 78 SACDs for only $340; Simon Rattle - The Berlin Years - 45 CDs; Wolfgang Sawallisch Collection - 43 CDs; Paavo Berglund Edition - 42 CDs; etc etc etc. The record company goal is clearly "let no classical collector escape with a disc collection numbering under triple (oops typo) quadruple digits". And most of these mega-releases are physical disc only, no download option - maybe because vendors such as Presto Music are worried about the potential for huge downloads to crash their servers.

 

[Axo1989]

I had to check to remind myself of what that looks like, and I say well worth the price for those who can afford it - especially the "in your face" factor if the owner can arrange for it to be viewed by professional or social rivals. Gives the impression it's going to come to life any moment and start talking to its owner about upgrade paths. The best colors are forest green or electric blue, best placement near a large picture window.

Not one but two second-hand pairs appeared in my local hi-fi shop recently. But both were black. I have my heart set on the fun colours.

 

[egellings]

I'm not so sure I'd agree with that.
Over the decades I'd bet more than a few have left my house saying,
He must be nuts spending that kind of money on Hi Fi when he could have gotten X, Y, or Z.

I've heard that from my family, and others family about our motorcycles many times for sure.
Or as they love to call them "murdercycles". KMA

On a motorcycle, your exposure is really high. You're lucky if all you get is road rash after an incident. Unless you stick your fingers into a tube amp, audio is comparatively safe.

 

[Sal1950]

On a motorcycle, your exposure is really high.

Oh well, if your scared, go to church instead. LOL

 

[D2013]

Oh well, if your scared, go to church instead. LOL

my state has a bunch of BS about bikes. I can get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt, but motorcyclists aren't required to wear helmets!

 

[Sal1950]

my state has a bunch of BS about bikes. I can get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt, but motorcyclists aren't required to wear helmets!

We riders have successfully fought helmet laws nation wide for decades and thankfully Grown Adults are now able to ride helmet free in the larger percentage of US states. Put on a full face helmet that highly obscures your peripheral vision and badly restricts your hearing, then tell me you feel safer from the auto drivers?
Let Those Who Ride Decide.

 

[D2013]

We riders have successfully fought helmet laws nation wide for decades and thankfully Grown Adults are now able to ride helmet free in the larger percentage of US states. Put on a full face helmet that highly obscures your peripheral vision and badly restricts your hearing, then tell me you feel safer from the auto drivers?
Let Those Who Ride Decide.

I've warn a race Helmut before, I still think its BS.

 

[Mr. Widget]

Put on a full face helmet that highly obscures your peripheral vision and badly restricts your hearing, then tell me you feel safer from the auto drivers?

I'll have to disagree with you here on both counts.

1. At speed wind causes your eyes to tear up and can be quite blinding. A well designed helmet does not obstruct your peripheral vision and can actually aid your vision.
2. While it may be counter intuitive, I know from personal experience that I could hear much better with a full face helmet than without one. Think of the effect as a wind screen on a mic when using it outdoors.

Of course, I agree no helmet is better at low speeds cruising around your neighborhood, but unfortunately too many people don't have common sense which is why we have laws to protect us and them from themselves.

 

[Anton D]

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), motorcycle helmets can reduce the risk of death by 1/3 and the risk of head injury by 69%.

Helmet Effectiveness | Skilled Motorcyclist Association

smarter-usa.org

But, don't let data get in the way of the heavy metal thunder.

A good compromise might be an indemnity arrangement where riders can choose to go without helmets but have no recourse to sue for head injury and have to cayy "non helmet user" insurance.

Let the people taking the physical risk also take the fiscal risk. Should not be a problem, eh?

Both sides can win!

 

[Sal1950]

1. At speed wind causes your eyes to tear up and can be quite blinding. A well designed helmet does not obstruct your peripheral vision and can actually aid your vision.

1. That's what good riding glasses are for with zero vision restriction. AFAIK, all states require vision protection to be worn.

2. While it may be counter intuitive, I know from personal experience that I could hear much better with a full face helmet than without one.

2. Completely opposite of my 60+ years on 2 wheels.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), motorcycle helmets can reduce the risk of death by 1/3 and the risk of head injury by 69%.

What the NHTSA can't give you are any numbers on the accidents that didn't happen in helmet law free states because the rider could see and hear what was going on around him. Or the numbers that did happen cause a mandatory helmeted rider couldn't see and hear what was going on around him.
Just like auto drivers, we all have and pay for our insurance and the cost is reflected in the real world liability numbers.

Thankfully the lawmakers in 32 of US 50 states have sided on the solid information presented them to ,
Let Those Who Ride Decide.

 

[D2013]

Thankfully the lawmakers in 32 of US 50 states have sided on the solid information presented them to ,
Let Those Who Ride Decide.

More like because lobbyists lined their pockets!

 

[RayDunzl]

No helmet required in my glider!

Some folks wear a parachute, though.

May be required in competition, where there may be a greater risk of collision.

 

[Doodski]

I have broken 2 Bell cycling helmets, once when cycling and the other time when I wiped out inline skating at speed and landed on my forehead. I have ruined 3 motorcycle helmets and one full face one was confiscated by the insurance company because it was considered too damaged for further use. I started riding on dirt bikes and my enduro ride indicated 34k km when I took it out of service and then I hit the street bikes and of course I steered from the rear wheel like a dirt bike and near died a couple of times. Helmets for me are mandatory. NO helmet = no riding for me!

 

[anotherhobby]

I totally understand not liking helmets, and I don't care if people wear them. The cruiser crowd likes to be "seen" on their bikes looking cool, and like to play their version dress up just like any other person on a moto, and the whole look is ruined by a helmet. I go full power ranger these days, so my helmet looks just as dumb as the rest of me, but I also understand why people do other things. The no helmet crew love the wind in the hair, the "free" feeling that comes without a helmet, and when you are used to riding that way, a helmet feels claustrophobic and stuffy. You also can't talk to your buddies at stops in a helmet unless you all have comms systems. Had a cruiser, been there, done that, didn't wear a helmet much, and I get it. However, anybody that tries to argue no helmet is safer is just simply lying to themselves to justify the above. No need to lie to yourself, the above reasons are fine, so who gives a shit? At least be honest with yourself.