All that is wrong with "HiFi"

[Rensselaer]

That’s fine, we disagree.

I am defending the proper use of language and words to convey meaning accurately. One of the problems when talking about this hobby is the challenge of conveying meaning through words.

The author clearly does not mean that the listeners were “literally blown away”. So what does he mean? I would prefer a written description of what the listener actually heard.

This excessive hyperbole is one of the problems with the “hi-fi” industry, or those who write about it, in my opinion.

Killed it! I’m gutted by your rebuttal.

 

[SoundMann]

Are you talking about systems with digital sources?

Not exclusively. But digital is the worst perpetrator here.

Budget analog systems sound great with companies like Project offering excellent value all-in-one turntable packages for under $1000.

A lot of vintage midfi systems are more musically fulfilling as well.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Listening to my old Mark levinson 360S .
I heard about 100 different modern Dacs over the past 2 weekends , i miss nothing .......
Have yet to hear Stevie ray vaughn with so much ambience / string attack as on the old ML.

Problem with HIFI these days is that there are far to much hyped products which dont deserve it .
And customers lose trace / oversight

 

[Al M.]

He is simply defending proper usage.

No, it's a metaphor, which is not about literal meaning and not about "proper usage". Without metaphors our language would be poor, and they should be appreciated as such.

 

[godofwealth]

Listening to my old Mark levinson 360S .
I heard about 100 different modern Dacs over the past 2 weekends , i miss nothing .......
Have yet to hear Stevie ray vaughn with so much ambience / string attack as on the old ML.

Problem with HIFI these days is that there are far to much hyped products which dont deserve it .
And customers lose trace / oversight

I suspect the older Levinson Reference products will give many modern solid state electronics a run for their money. Their two box statement DAC was quite extraordinary.

 

[Lagonda]

The most important question for every audiophile is “what exactly I need?” .
I think it takes minimum 5 years to find the right answer.
Finding the answer is not easy and In this way Magazines and industry are not helpful.


There are many audiophiles who (even after 30 years) change their expensive equipments every 6 month and claim the new equipment is better.

Inspired by ruthless dealers trying to sell them something different constantly !

 

[Al M.]

It would be fine to write that someone was “blown away by the sound of a system”.

It is a very different thing to write that someone was “literally blown away by the sound of a system”.

Do you not see the radically different meanings between those two sentences?

“Literally “should not be used to add emphasis. If you want to add emphasis, simply right that the listener was “really” or “extremely” blown away.

"Literally" in that context was a metaphor in itself, or a vital part of the metaphor. That should be so obvious that it shouldn't even have to be mentioned.

We should bring the language of how we describe the sound of audio systems back down to earth, and in my opinion, focus on what the listener actually hears rather than speak in metaphors that have vague meanings.

Describing a sound experience can be, and obviously was in this case, filled with enthusiasm and yes, picturesque vagueness. This was not a math exam, and certainly it was not a detailed review of a system sound where you should be more precise.

 

[TonyW]

My system blows me away every time I listen. I mean that in the metaphorical sense because I literally become engrossed in the music.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

No, it's a metaphor, which is not about literal meaning and not about "proper usage". Without metaphors our language would be poor, and they should be appreciated as such.

Perhaps it would have been better the original use of "literally" been ignored or the original response to it been ignored (or reponded as you did).

 

[TonyW]

One of the trends that I have noticed is that the cost of luxury items have increased well above inflation the last half decade. From the 1980's to about 2015 luxury items tracked the rate of inflation. That's not just hifi but luxury watches and cars as well. But then the market changed with the introduction of ultimate series or "Reference" series of products. Even luxury cars have increased well above the rate of inflation. For example, my favorite car cost $115k in 2015. The similarly equipped car today is $165k- that's a 43% increase in 9 years. Based on the rate of inflation, that car should cost $150k today. On the other hand, a Cadillac Eldorado cost $12,500 in 1956. (I saw one in a showroom in New Orleans- quite a beauty.) That is $143k in today's dollars. It was considered ultra luxury back in the day but now ultra luxury cars are in the $200k+ range. Hifi tracked inflation for years as well. Another example- the ARC SP-15, their top of the line preamp in 1989 cost $6k. Today, that cost would be $15k based on the published rate of inflation. ARC did not have a Reference Series back then. I notice the GSPre is priced at $15k. How it compares to the SP-15 I do not know.

The question is: Do these Uberpriced "Reference" series products justify their price. Do they advance the state of hifi? I believe so but not in every case. It's like this: I visited Axpona 2022. I stopped in many rooms to hear the various systems. It's a bell curve. A few rooms did not sound so good to me and a few rooms sounded remarkably good to me. That's each end of the bell curve. Everything else fits in the middle of the bell curve. It all sounded good but did not stand out like the best of the best at the far right of the bell curve. System cost did not correlate to the best sounding systems. And of course I was comparing all of this to my system and came to the conclusion that I was due. I needed to make some changes to my system because I really liked the sound of those handful of systems that were at the extreme right of the bell curve. And this experience is the same for other shows I visited as well as visiting various hifi shops around the country and around the world over the last 4-5 decades.

My personal experience is that the journey, the hifi journey is not linear. A few pieces of gear had to come and go. Every step is a learning experience even after being in this hobby since the 1970's. Some learning experiences are more expensive than others.

Is there something wrong with hifi? It can feel like it when we experience frustration with dealers, equipment or our own shortcomings. I mean literally the space between my ears can be the biggest roadblock to stereo nirvana. Second to that is my wife.

 

[PeterA]

I am curious to know how many are still interested in new gear. More and more of my friends have found their final systems and no longer really pay attention to what is new. They enjoy what they have and seem pretty much finished changing gear.

 

[the sound of Tao]

I am curious to know how many are still interested in new gear. More and more of my friends have found their final systems and no longer really pay attention to what is new. They enjoy what they have and seem pretty much finished changing gear.

This is a big part of it for me as well, it is inevitable that after putting decades in that some/many of us may actually find ourselves at the point where the fundamental basis in the system is at a place where we want to be at. It’s probably a good strategy to have some area as a work in progress to keep active with things… I’m working on the second setup as my play area to avoid senescence and audio cabin fever.

Contentment with gear is something that industry may just actively want to discourage. I’m sure we ourselves are a big part of that issue.

Some avenues seem to drive endless upgrades (sideways?), if you don’t have clear aims and targets it’s easy to get lost (or stay lost) in this.

 

[TonyW]

I am at a point of rest with my system. This upgrade cycle took me 3 1/2 years. Part of that was getting into streaming music. That was quite a learning curve for an old guy like me. In the end I finally figured out all it took was obscene amounts of money to make streaming sound good. I've gone from 90% vinyl listening/10% digital to 95% digital. The vinyl still sounds amazing but it's too easy for me to sit down with the iPad and pick any song I want- any song out of millions. I also made upgrades to my dedicated listening room. Being retired allowed me to take the time to do so much more than I could have done while working.

I revamped my system every 7-10 years although this last cycle was 15 years. Mostly, I was too busy with kids and work to do anything but buy replacement phono cartridges. I've had 5 pairs of speakers since 1980, 5 ARC preamps since 1988- two of those in the last 3 years. Two pair of speakers remained in my system for 15 years each. The upgrade cycles took me about 2 years to complete, except for the most recent.

Vintage gear has a place in hifi audio, to be sure. Until recently I was using vintage gear. Right now, I plan to still have my current gear when it becomes vintage. Keep in mind this rule of thumb: if a piece of stereo gear can be repaired, then it will hold its value. Think about that when buying a DAC on a stick...

 

[Charles S]

This is a big part of it for me as well, it is inevitable that after putting decades in that some/many of us may actually find themselves at the point where the fundamental basis in the system is at a place where we want to be at. It’s probably a good strategy to have some area as a work in progress to keep active with things… I’m working on the second setup as my play area to avoid senescence and audio cabin fever.

Contentment with gear is something that industry may just actively want to discourage. I’m sure we ourselves are a big part of that issue.

Some avenues seem to drive endless upgrades (sideways?), if you don’t have clear aims and targets it’s easy to get lost in this.

The MC-12000 retails for 16K. In 2005 the MC-1000 3 box set retailed for 26K and the 2 box SS for 18K. The MC-12000 is the finest pre I have had in my system. It is much better than a C-1000. I can't think of a pre I would swap it for in my system. My MC3500 is approximately 3x more powerful than a VAC Statement 450 IQ and I can buy 5 pairs of them for the price of 1 Statement 450 IQ, which is 150K. I wouldn't even remotely consider an even swap. It drives the **** out of my XVX and runs very cool. I'm 100% through with high end purchases, unless my LD player bites the dust. I can't tell how wonderful it is to have plenty of money, be in excellent health, have excellent vision, balance, and hearing and after 60 years of upgrades to finally be finished, through, done, and very happy. I'll be thinking about you guys maybe for 5 minutes tonight while skating.

Amps: McIntosh: MC3500MKII (2); MC1.25KW (2); MC2.1KW An
Preamp: C-12000 An
Sources: MCD12000 An; MVP881; MVP851; MR87; Marantz 510LV; Lenovo Yoga laptop
Speakers: Wilson Chronosonic XVX
Sub-Woofer: Wilson Thor’s Hammer; Wilson ActivXO Stereo Electronic Crossover
Cables Main System AQ: WEL Signature speaker cables; 24’ balanced IC; balanced 1-meter Dragon IC ; WEL Signature digital, Coffee digital coaxial cables; Diamond optical (2); Diamond USB; Dragon (5 HC, 3 source cords); Thunder & Monsoon power cords
Cables Subwoofer System AQ: Redwood speaker cable; Wolf balanced subwoofer IC; Wind balanced IC to ActivXO; Hurricane HC; Firebird HC; Firebird Source; Dragon HC, power cords
Power Conditioners: AQ Niagara 7000; Niagara 5000 (3); (4) dedicated 20-amp lines.
Isolation: Wilson Pedestals; Bassocontinuo McIntosh Ultra Feet; X-material plinth
Cabinet: Double Custom Woodwork & Design (CWD)
Acoustic Treatments: Room and Echo Tunes

 

[TonyW]

This is a big part of it for me as well, it is inevitable that after putting decades in that some/many of us may actually find ourselves at the point where the fundamental basis in the system is at a place where we want to be at. It’s probably a good strategy to have some area as a work in progress to keep active with things… I’m working on the second setup as my play area to avoid senescence and audio cabin fever.

Contentment with gear is something that industry may just actively want to discourage. I’m sure we ourselves are a big part of that issue.

Some avenues seem to drive endless upgrades (sideways?), if you don’t have clear aims and targets it’s easy to get lost (or stay lost) in this.

You mean how I finally got my Wilson speakers and just 2 1/2 years later they are now a discontinued model.

 

[Al M.]

The question is: Do these Uberpriced "Reference" series products justify their price. Do they advance the state of hifi? I believe so but not in every case. It's like this: I visited Axpona 2022. I stopped in many rooms to hear the various systems. It's a bell curve. A few rooms did not sound so good to me and a few rooms sounded remarkably good to me. That's each end of the bell curve. Everything else fits in the middle of the bell curve. It all sounded good but did not stand out like the best of the best at the far right of the bell curve. System cost did not correlate to the best sounding systems. And of course I was comparing all of this to my system and came to the conclusion that I was due. I needed to make some changes to my system because I really liked the sound of those handful of systems that were at the extreme right of the bell curve. And this experience is the same for other shows I visited as well as visiting various hifi shops around the country and around the world over the last 4-5 decades.

I don't judge systems from shows -- unless they stand out, which then is a reference point to me. There is so much that can go wrong at shows, room acoustics, unclean/insufficient power from the wall, component mismatch, details of setup etc. If a system sounds bad or mediocre, I come to no conclusions. If a system stands out in quality, I take note.

One of the systems that stood out to me at T.H.E. Show 2023 in Southern California was the PranaFidelity room with PranaFidelity Dhyana speakers. Ultimately it was the most musically satisfying to me. I listened there for hours with eventually all my test CDs that I wanted to hear. I ended up buying the speakers. I love them.

 

[Lee]

From my perspective, it is not that I believe a review is biased because of payment or freebies, but rather a compartmentalisation of the item reviewed into a “price point” where it can stand head and shoulders above other such products at that “price point” (but not be referenced, and ranked against, the best). Where does it stand amongst all the rest?

The other perspective that the newbie (and not so new) audiophile might want from the reviewer (I certainly did) is synergy. Instead of reviewing a single CD player (amongst the reviewers gear) spend more time trying it in different systems and against different known performers (reviewed item compared with Wadia, Wadex, etc.). In the end tell the reader how he would get the most from the item reviewed. That front end with this amplifier with these particular speakers and cables creates a system that compares with some of the very best out there, or these horn speakers and those SETs, those Electrostatics with this particular subwoofer, etc., have always set the bar to me for the most real sounding of that type of system.

In regards to the point made by the OP, that hifi’s direction towards detail has made equipment less musical, some of us, as a result of that, have turned back to vintage equipment that we know it to be musical. Magazines like Sound Practices that offer schematics and build layouts for rolling your own cables, speakers, turntable or amplifier are greatly appreciated by those of us who wished we could afford a $700,000.00 system (or more) but can’t. Using home made and worn but serviceable vintage gear mixed with decent items (like cartridges) has allowed me to build a very “musical” system at a fraction of the cost of the best new off the shelf gear.

Doesn’t detail enhance the playback as well?

Extra resolution means capturing more of a violin’s tone. It means better bass. It adds to micro and macro dynamics.

I don’t believe resolution is the bad guy here. I think it’s part of better playback. I view detail and musicality as parallel paths.

 

[Al M.]

Doesn’t detail enhance the playback as well?

Extra resolution means capturing more of a violin’s tone. It means better bass. It adds to micro and macro dynamics.

I don’t believe resolution is the bad guy here. I think it’s part of better playback. I view detail and musicality as parallel paths.

Very much agreed.

I would add though that the quality of presentation of detail of an instrument's tone, or that of groups of instruments, matters. My current speakers present as much detail as my previous monitors, if not more. Yet the detail draws less attention to itself than before. In that sense it more resembles the experience of detail in live music.

 

[Lee]

I am at a point of rest with my system. This upgrade cycle took me 3 1/2 years. Part of that was getting into streaming music. That was quite a learning curve for an old guy like me. In the end I finally figured out all it took was obscene amounts of money to make streaming sound good. I've gone from 90% vinyl listening/10% digital to 95% digital. The vinyl still sounds amazing but it's too easy for me to sit down with the iPad and pick any song I want- any song out of millions. I also made upgrades to my dedicated listening room. Being retired allowed me to take the time to do so much more than I could have done while working.

I revamped my system every 7-10 years although this last cycle was 15 years. Mostly, I was too busy with kids and work to do anything but buy replacement phono cartridges. I've had 5 pairs of speakers since 1980, 5 ARC preamps since 1988- two of those in the last 3 years. Two pair of speakers remained in my system for 15 years each. The upgrade cycles took me about 2 years to complete, except for the most recent.

Vintage gear has a place in hifi audio, to be sure. Until recently I was using vintage gear. Right now, I plan to still have my current gear when it becomes vintage. Keep in mind this rule of thumb: if a piece of stereo gear can be repaired, then it will hold its value. Think about that when buying a DAC on a stick...

I have an amazing turntable that is incredibly musically engaging but some nights I do just want to bring the iPad and fire up the Mosaic app and stream Qobuz on the Rossini Apex. It sounds great too.

As for the prices in the industry, I have a few observations as someone who has worked in the industry…

1. Parts inflation has been significant and real. Many manufacturers have to pass along these costs. Many parts are 4-5X what they were four years ago.
2. Like any luxury good, there has been the emergence of an ultra luxury customer segment. Catering to those folks is just good business. And knowledge from building these products genuinely finds its way down to more affordable gear.
3. Prices on some products are eye watering. But so what? Nobody is holding a gun to our heads to buy them. If the value isn’t there for you or me, we should not buy it.
4. Magazines as commonly used here is very misleading. TAS and Stereophile are digital media firms that also put out a magazine. Advertising releationships are almost always digital and print.
5. A lot of YouTube reviewers lack genuine experience. But they can be very entertaining. It’s like anything else, some are worth trusting, some are fun to watch, and some are talking their book and/or compromised.

 

[Lee]

Very much agreed.

I would add though that the quality of presentation of detail of an instrument's tone, or that of groups of instruments, matters. My current speakers present as much detail as my previous monitors, if not more. Yet the detail draws less attention to itself than before. In that sense it more resembles the experience of detail in live music.

Agreed and same experience here with my Alexia Vs. I’ve done loads of violin recordings. Digital playback of violin tone was greatly advanced by hirez digital. Capturing the sweetness of a Guarnerir or Strad is very hard to do on 16/44. Probably impossible. So that’s why I used the violin example. Same for guitar as well.