Was this aimed at ASR?

[sq225917]

Just accept, you're not buying for the same reason these people are. They're buying into a proposal, a brand, an ownership experience, its veblen goods, not healthcare.

 

[Inner Space]

I dunno. I recall a guy in Marin County, had a hell of a lot of money. Happened to have a minature railroad, was obssesed with military gear, had a tank. Also built a room for an organ, with a proper acoustic, so it was a site for recording. That's how I knew about it

You think about how much the Sun King blew on sets and scenery at Versailles, but he also paid a lot a musicians, including François Couperin and Marin Marais. I guess if it's the difference between a $700 and a $20,000 DAC, both performing at the same level, or with the cheaper one performing better, pointing out that info serves a public service. But if they're already into tubes and turntables, best to write it off as a lost cause. I never saw the value of that minature reailroad, but that guy spent a lot more money on that [had tracks for miles] than on the music room with the pipe organ. Somebody who's already commited to spending too much money on records and tubes isn't about to listen to someone like me. They'l probably listen to someone like Jim Austin or Jeff Dorgay. A lot of this is selling "High-End Audio" as lifestyle, where measurements don't count.

Exactly this. Couldn't agree more. I think "harmed" is the wrong concept. Jim Austin ain't a meth dealer. He's one of a million scufflers participating in the gigantic disposal-of-disposable-income trade around the world. We get irritated and annoyed because we "know better" about this one tiny part of the bubble. But it's the same everywhere ... *looking around the room* ... I have bookshelves which many cabinet makers (who "know better") would regard as ridiculous, and a clock that clock enthusiasts would laugh at, and a pretty fireplace that heating engineers would scoff at, and so on and so forth. Guys are spending $20k on things that bring them pleasure, and why not?

And that said, I feel Stereophile walks a fine line pretty well. On the one hand, it's participating in "our" hobby in ways we don't approve of (someone's wrong on the internet!) and yet it does it in a way that, between the lines, is actually OK with me. When you learn their house style, you can detect their real message - especially with Atkinson, whose natural tact and politeness (and commercial commonsense) softens what I take to be fairly savage put-downs.

 

[LDKTA]

Just accept, you're not buying for the same reason these people are. They're buying into a proposal, a brand, an ownership experience, its veblen goods, not healthcare.

I understand Veblen goods very well. This is more than Veblen goods, at least to me it is. I don't see an issue with buying a Ferrari if you want it and you're able to do so comfortably. However, there'd certainly be an issue with purchasing a replica of a Ferrari when you think you're purchasing a real Ferrari for real Ferarri prices. As ridiculous as that may sound, it is just as ridiculous as someone purchasing $30k cables and thinking that cable will perform any better than $30 cables. Purchasing Veblen goods is not a scam.

 

[maverickronin]

They're buying into a proposal, a brand, an ownership experience, its veblen goods, not healthcare.

No. The problem is that the industry paints them as normal goods when they're really velben disguised by false notions of utility.

Ferrari owners will readily admit they bought one because it was cool and prestigious. How often will an audiophile admit to purchasing components on that basis?

 

[sq225917]

People who buy 50k hifi don't care about how it measures, that's not what they are buying. The assumption many on this forum seem to be working on is that print media holds sway over measurement obsessed buyers. It absolutely doesn't.

Just accept that what you/we want isnt the same as what they want. If people only bought on measurements there would be no print media and only ASR and Hydrogen Audio on the Web.

They want, status, adoration, acceptance and a bunch of other stuff that has no effect on the music signal, but plenty on their enjoyment of it.

Youre not saving anyone from themselves, they don't want saving, youre just being a zealot.

No one with a Kondo setup gives a rats ass about measurement. They want mysticism, glowing valves, camera quality fit and finish and a badge. Their just as capable of using their ears as we are and no more likely to buy stuff they think sounds shit than we are.

I dont know anyone with a 100k set up who says it sounds shit but they bought it because someone said they should. Do you?

 

[Purité Audio]

That stuff is sold on the premise that it adds extra air, sounds more like live music etc etc, dealers and manufacturers don’t tell customers that it is just hugely expensive poorly designed equipment that just adds distortion.
Keith

 

[scott wurcer]

I dont know anyone with a 100k set up who says it sounds shit but they bought it because someone said they should. Do you?

There was a story a long time ago about someone giving Lyric Hi-Fi a budget like that to set up an "ultimate" system and when he listened he said it sounded like shite and made them take it all back.

 

[North_Sky]

It's like buying cars and houses and swimming pools ...

 

[Southall-1998]

People who buy 50k hifi don't care about how it measures, that's not what they are buying. The assumption many on this forum seem to be working on is that print media holds sway over measurement obsessed buyers. It absolutely doesn't.

Just accept that what you/we want isnt the same as what they want. If people only bought on measurements there would be no print media and only ASR and Hydrogen Audio on the Web.

They want, status, adoration, acceptance and a bunch of other stuff that has no effect on the music signal, but plenty on their enjoyment of it.

Youre not saving anyone from themselves, they don't want saving, youre just being a zealot.

No one with a Kondo setup gives a rats ass about measurement. They want mysticism, glowing valves, camera quality fit and finish and a badge. Their just as capable of using their ears as we are and no more likely to buy stuff they think sounds shit than we are.

I dont know anyone with a 100k set up who says it sounds shit but they bought it because someone said they should. Do you?

Well said.

S.

 

[DonH56]

People who buy 50k hifi don't care about how it measures, that's not what they are buying. The assumption many on this forum seem to be working on is that print media holds sway over measurement obsessed buyers. It absolutely doesn't.

Just accept that what you/we want isnt the same as what they want. If people only bought on measurements there would be no print media and only ASR and Hydrogen Audio on the Web.

They want, status, adoration, acceptance and a bunch of other stuff that has no effect on the music signal, but plenty on their enjoyment of it.

Youre not saving anyone from themselves, they don't want saving, youre just being a zealot.

No one with a Kondo setup gives a rats ass about measurement. They want mysticism, glowing valves, camera quality fit and finish and a badge. Their just as capable of using their ears as we are and no more likely to buy stuff they think sounds shit than we are.

I dont know anyone with a 100k set up who says it sounds shit but they bought it because someone said they should. Do you?

I have an SDP-75 (Trinnov Altitude 32) and cheap (Emotiva) amps driving a full set of Revel speakers (6 x Salon2 plus Voice2). Retail is well north of $50k (no, I did not pay retail), and I do care about measurements. I never thought about status and adoration; it was decades building up to this, and I'm still somewhat in shock that the stars aligned and I was able to get it. I've been out of the biz a long time, but know several people with comparable systems who bought on specs as well as other factors so I would not issue a blanket statement that all folk with expensive systems don't care about measurements. For that matter, some years back there was a time when people were obsessing on measurements, and would buy to "one-up" there neighbors by getting the 0.001% amp instead of the 0.005% model. Too much of a good thing...

And I saved my best argument for last: @amirm.

 

[audiophile]

No one is harmed by spending $20K on an amp because of the poetry written in said "review?" Did that money grow on trees and could not have been put toward a more legitimate use?

I think most people who buy $20k amps can afford them, so no one is harmed.

Amir, if I remember correctly, your own hi-fi system is not cheap either. Knowing that the same level of performance could have been achieved with far less money, why don’t you downgrade and put the excess cash toward a more legitimate use? I’m genuinely curious.

 

[Jimbob54]

I think most people who buy $20k amps can afford them, so no one is harmed.

Amir, if I remember correctly, your own hi-fi system is not cheap either. Knowing that the same level of performance could have been achieved with far less money, why don’t you downgrade and put the excess cash toward a more legitimate use? I’m genuinely curious.

I might be wrong, but I think @DonH56 and @amirm have a large proportion of the kit total budget tied up in (revel) speakers. That scale and level of performance can never be had cheap.

 

[DonH56]

I don't have a problem with somebody spending $1k or $20k on an amp if they are getting decent value or some intangible benefit, like pride of ownership and all that jazz. Assuming they can afford it. A $100k amp that is measurably and sonically worse than an amp costing an order of magnitude less, yet gets a good review for its "particularly lovely sonic character" (with the right speaker, source, etc.) , tends to raise my ire a bit. And then there are cables, magic dots, and all the other costly audio jewelry consumers are convinced they need that add essentially zero benefit (IMO). The problem for me is those consumers who stretch or go without other things to purchase items demonstrably poorer in performance or flat-out unneeded.

 

[audiophile]

I might be wrong, but I think @DonH56 and @amirm have a large proportion of the kit total budget tied up in (revel) speakers. That scale and level of performance can never be had cheap.

Right, those Revel speakers aren’t cheap. But if I remember correctly Amir’s setup also includes Mark Levinson DAC / amp.

 

[amirm]

I dunno. I recall a guy in Marin County, had a hell of a lot of money. Happened to have a minature railroad, was obssesed with military gear, had a tank. Also built a room for an organ, with a proper acoustic, so it was a site for recording. That's how I knew about it

We have a lot of super wealthy clients at Madrona. I can assure you though that few read stereophile. They usually have a representative that may do some surveying of what is out there but the don't frequent magazines and such. They usually rely on high-end dealers to assure them what is "best" and they just buy it.

BTW, I too know a wealthy person into trains. He actually owns full sized trains together with some 120 miles of tracks! He bought the whole deal and lets the local train enthusiasts maintain it for him.

I also know of wealthy people who buy a $200K system, to retire the last $200K system to the garage. And on and on.

The number of high-end audiophiles who read forums and stereophile are a fraction of that market.

 

[Jimbob54]

Right, those Revel speakers aren’t cheap. But if I remember correctly Amir’s setup also includes Mark Levinson DAC / amp.

Quite possibly. Im not familiar with kit in those price ranges, but I'd still bet $$ that a high % of kit budget is in speakers (and thats assuming 2 channel, sounds like Don has multi channel)

 

[amirm]

I think most people who buy $20k amps can afford them, so no one is harmed.

Amir, if I remember correctly, your own hi-fi system is not cheap either. Knowing that the same level of performance could have been achieved with far less money, why don’t you downgrade and put the excess cash toward a more legitimate use? I’m genuinely curious.

Let me answer this way: if I were starting over, I would still buy my speakers but would pay a lot less for amplification. I have already "downgraded" in DAC by going with Matrix. There was a time I was looking at $15K DAC/streamers.

I do love the the way my amps look though.

 

[Jimbob54]

Let me answer this way: if I were starting over, I would still buy my speakers but would pay a lot less for amplification. I have already "downgraded" in DAC by going with Matrix. There was a time I was looking at $15K DAC/streamers.

I do love the the way my amps look though.

And (in RRP terms ) are the speakers a hefty proportion of the total budget? Rough guestimate? EDIT- before "downgrade" of DAC/ streamer

 

[smallricey]

No. The problem is that the industry paints them as normal goods when they're really velben disguised by false notions of utility.

Ferrari owners will readily admit they bought one because it was cool and prestigious. How often will an audiophile admit to purchasing components on that basis?

You are buying a Ferrari because the cool prestigious factor; however, it's indeed a fun driving machine.

I don't own a Ferrari, but driving F-Type and planning on owning the new Vette is not because it's just cool and prestigious.
It does indeed have better handle and better throttle response. Honestly driving one has made the rides in Disney Land boring as hell.
However, we are now claiming these expensive DACs, cables, and speakers don't really have any added benefit except for cool and prestigious factors. That's a whole different claim than calling out the Ferrari crowds saying they should just admit what they got is the same as driving a Prius.

For what it's worth, I wish what ASR is claiming is true.
Same goes for Tesla being able to create some bargain car that beats owning a Ferrari.
Better bargain for the consumers are always great.

 

[DonH56]

Speakers represent about 80% of my total system's retail value.