Hi fi junk vs great art and musical instruments

[godofwealth]

Why are the great hifi components from yesteryear just junk today? Here’s a picture of hifi junk that I’m throwing out today. Martin Logan CLS stats from 30 years ago is just junk today. Add non-working solid state components from Primare and Tact. All are consigned to the dustbin of history. Electronic garbage.

In contrast, if you lived 300 years ago and purchased one of Antonio Stradivarius’ violins for a few lira, today it’s worth in the tens of millions of dollars. Or if you lived in Paris during the time when Vincent Van Gogh was peddling his masterpieces in street cafes for a few francs, you’d have a painting worth a hundred million dollars today. Why is great art and musical instruments worth so much more than 30-year old hifi junk? What does that say about audiophiles?

 

[Another Johnson]

Technology marches on. The best hi fi of 1990 has been surpassed (some will argue about this, but I’m not one of them). The Stradivarii have not been. Artisans try to duplicate them. Only Far Eastern counterfeiters try to reproduce 1990 hi fi. Neither succeeds. FWIW, I feel your pain.

 

[Al M.]

Technology marches on. The best hi fi of 1990 has been surpassed (some will argue about this, but I’m not one of them).

Agreed.

 

[mulveling]

Point to point wired tube amps and cone drivers can last a LOT longer. They're maintainable and repairable (to some degree). Look at 1950s McIntosh tube amps and Tannoy dual-concentric drivers (Black, Silver, Gold, Red, HPD) - both still desirable and highly valued today; both appreciated above their original value. That is of course, one extreme of the gear spectrum. But you're certainly looking at the extreme when you reference Stradivarius.

On the other end: PCBs can be problematic in time, and transistors are extremely problematic when they go OOP (as many do). I suppose the same goes for some kinds of panel speakers. Unfortunately with the result they eventually turn into "junk". I'm sorry you've ended up on the bad side here - that Primare gear really should've lasted longer

And what does it say about audiophiles? Not much, really. Just like ANY hobby, most of the stuff we purchase for it isn't a good investment if we're accounting for it as a pure asset (ignoring the value of enjoyment rendered).

 

[Djcxxx]

Your point is well taken, but sadly many great works of art are also deteriorating due to the ravages of time, neglect, even vandalism.

 

[DasguteOhr]

Why are the great hifi components from yesteryear just junk today? Here’s a picture of hifi junk that I’m throwing out today. Martin Logan CLS stats from 30 years ago is just junk today. Add non-working solid state components from Primare and Tact. All are consigned to the dustbin of history. Electronic garbage.

In contrast, if you lived 300 years ago and purchased one of Antonio Stradivarius’ violins for a few lira, today it’s worth in the tens of millions of dollars. Or if you lived in Paris during the time when Vincent Van Gogh was peddling his masterpieces in street cafes for a few francs, you’d have a painting worth a hundred million dollars today. Why is great art and musical instruments worth so much more than 30-year old hifi junk? What does that say about audiophiles?

View attachment 116198

With audio research sp 10 and krell ksa 50 I wouldn't call it garbage, I know people who still listen to music with it today. I count myself among them, the whole modern stuff is no longer price-worthy.

 

[godofwealth]

One only has to look at how the prices of yesterday’s high priced DACs have crashed to see the incredible uselessness of most hifi. DACs that were $80K a few years ago now sell for under $10K. In a few years they’ll clutter up some landfill. While a good Steinway piano holds its value and even greatly appreciates over decades, high priced DACs, speakers etc. are just junk in a few years. They hold no aesthetic or musical value. A cynic might look at a Van Gogh painting and say it’s just a dab of paint on canvas, but it holds enormous cultural and artistic value, not to mention monetary value. France regards paintings by its great masters as a national heritage. No country regards hifi artifacts as national heritage. It’s just like an old vacuum cleaner that gets thrown out.

 

[Another Johnson]

FWIW, some McIntosh gear from the ‘60s often trades at 10 times its original msrp.

 

[Al M.]

One only has to look at how the prices of yesterday’s high priced DACs have crashed to see the incredible uselessness of most hifi. DACs that were $80K a few years ago now sell for under $10K. In a few years they’ll clutter up some landfill. While a good Steinway piano holds its value and even greatly appreciates over decades, high priced DACs, speakers etc. are just junk in a few years. They hold no aesthetic or musical value. A cynic might look at a Van Gogh painting and say it’s just a dab of paint on canvas, but it holds enormous cultural and artistic value, not to mention monetary value. France regards paintings by its great masters as a national heritage. No country regards hifi artifacts as national heritage. It’s just like an old vacuum cleaner that gets thrown out.

Other tech loses value too. Just look at computers and phones (unless you have one of the first few serial # of an Apple II computer).

Nothing exceptional about hi-fi in that regard.

 

[MarkusBarkus]

...the modern stuff lasts more than just a few years, right? I'm thinking at least 20 years or so. One might be tempted by new, better sounding tech, but the older stuff should last for a while.

I'm 65 (and change) and considering some Pilium gear. That'll be 100+ K from the treasure chest. You guys telling me it'll only last a few years? I would be hoping to get 20 out of it, and be almost/dead or deaf by then.

I'm not considering it to make money, but if it's tits-up in a few years, that would be a stupid investment, no matter how big the war chest is.

 

[godofwealth]

FWIW, some McIntosh gear from the ‘60s often trades at 10 times its original msrp.

Hmm… perhaps 300 years from now, a McIntosh 275 amplifier might be worth $3 million dollars! If humanity survives that long and climate change doesn’t finish us off by then. Right now, the prognosis is looking pretty bleak. We’re busy build giant power hungry data centers equipped with the latest nVidia H-100 GPUs so that every business can become chstGPTized. Your next DAC or preamp or streamer will have a chatGPT interface.

 

[PYP]

Why are the great hifi components from yesteryear just junk today? Here’s a picture of hifi junk that I’m throwing out today. Martin Logan CLS stats from 30 years ago is just junk today. Add non-working solid state components from Primare and Tact. All are consigned to the dustbin of history. Electronic garbage.

In contrast, if you lived 300 years ago and purchased one of Antonio Stradivarius’ violins for a few lira, today it’s worth in the tens of millions of dollars. Or if you lived in Paris during the time when Vincent Van Gogh was peddling his masterpieces in street cafes for a few francs, you’d have a painting worth a hundred million dollars today. Why is great art and musical instruments worth so much more than 30-year old hifi junk? What does that say about audiophiles?

View attachment 116198

nice ruse. We all know you are moving these to the Geneva Freeport to avoid taxes on your appreciated gear. Shame on you!

 

[adrianywu]

It is generally true that only a small percentage of products retain their value, and this is also true for art, music and literature. For all the symphonies of Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Mahler etc we still listen to nowadays, there are perhaps 100 times as much music written during those eras that people have forgotten. And of all the classic literature still revered today, there are perhaps 1000 times as many books that have been relegated to the junkyard of history. Of all the ultra-expensive high end audio equipment today, how many will still retain any value in 20 years' time ? Time is the final arbiter of quality and value.

 

[bonzo75]

Modern art and modern hifi both have high value for this quality

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/29/1041492941/jens-haaning-kunsten-take-the-money-and-run-art-denmark-blank

 

[Another Johnson]

Don’t forget this one (by Banksy)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_is_in_the_Bin#:~:text=According%20to%20Sotheby's%2C%20it%20is,Love%20is%20in%20the%20Bin.

As for Stradivarii, they are no longer owned, but loaned. A deep pockets benefactor buys the violin from like kind, and then loans it to the artist whom the benefactor decides could use it best, sometimes for a literal lifetime. It is a true patronage.

Can you imagine a HiFi component increasing in value until only a few hyperwealthy people could afford it … and then it would be bought by one, and loaned out to the so-called Golden Ear who could most benefit from listening to it?

I am kidding on the level.

 

[RCanelas]

This is a topic that is close to my heart and a central part of my views on hifi.

Current consumer electronics dynamics promotes the use of cheap over robust, and cheap is found when either the parts or the process are be banal. Also, banal is somewhat easier to sell. Silly screens everywhere, linear combination of stock parts just anodized in different colors, dubious industrial design covering a stock stamped sheet aluminum box.

Some materials are not immortal. Mylar micron-thick films degrade and fail. Oil caps dry out. Sure. But those are material imposed limitations and a brand proposing these products typically factors that in several ways. But what about design limitations? For example, even if the thumb sized screen on the front of a $50k 220 pound preamp doesn't fail in 20 years, will you or anyone want it there in 20 years? It already looks out of place today, IMO. Do we have the need to resort to these mass product design cues in such a specialized and added-value based market as hifi? Especially on the high-end segment?

IMO, the best way to not have junk is to not design it as such and take our design cues from samsung, pretending it's apple and sell (also buy) it as Stradivarius level intemporal.

 

[Lee]

The Continuum Caliburn may be a good counter-example here. Production ended in 2012 but it’s still one of the best turntables out there. Probably will last several more decades with no loss of performance. It’s built like a tank but unfortunately weighs almost as much.

Financially, it has depreciated from $150K to $50K.

Good design and build quality do exist in many other examples.

I think with digital, the FPGA DACs may have the right approach as software can keep them current for longer periods of time.

 

[PYP]

I think with digital, the FPGA DACs may have the right approach as software can keep them current for longer periods of time.

Like many folks here, my DAC and DDC are FPGA-based and have received updates several times. That development, and the ability for some manufacturers to tunnel into the component remotely to troubleshoot a problem (or do an update), are worth noting when we consider longevity.

Just as true, however, is that the chips themselves evolve quickly and the manufacturer has made a hardware choice that can be improved upon in a few years. At what point are the software updates unable to offset the hardware limitations (given chip improvement over time)?

Do you expect to keep your components for the next, say, 20 years? And is that based upon how long you have kept previous equipment?

 

[Lee]

Like many folks here, my DAC and DDC are FPGA-based and have received updates several times. That development, and the ability for some manufacturers to tunnel into the component remotely to troubleshoot a problem (or do an update), are worth noting when we consider longevity.

Just as true, however, is that the chips themselves evolve quickly and the manufacturer has made a hardware choice that can be improved upon in a few years. At what point are the software updates unable to offset the hardware limitations (given chip improvement over time)?

Do you expect to keep your components for the next, say, 20 years? And is that based upon how long you have kept previous equipment?

Difficult questions to answer...in my own case, I would love to get 8-10 years from the Rossini Apex via FPGA updates. In the case of dCS it is not chip based and the Ring DAC improvements have been in part software based over time and recently a board swap for Apex since both the ring and analog boards changed.

With chips it looks to be harder to do. Will Wadax, MSB, and Esoteric update their chips over time?

Historically I switched DACs every 2-5 years. No doubt digital advances make this area the hardest part for someone wanting to settle in on a system. Honestly though with where I am at now, I could live with the sound for the rest of my life.

 

[Lagonda]

Why are the great hifi components from yesteryear just junk today? Here’s a picture of hifi junk that I’m throwing out today. Martin Logan CLS stats from 30 years ago is just junk today. Add non-working solid state components from Primare and Tact. All are consigned to the dustbin of history. Electronic garbage.

In contrast, if you lived 300 years ago and purchased one of Antonio Stradivarius’ violins for a few lira, today it’s worth in the tens of millions of dollars. Or if you lived in Paris during the time when Vincent Van Gogh was peddling his masterpieces in street cafes for a few francs, you’d have a painting worth a hundred million dollars today. Why is great art and musical instruments worth so much more than 30-year old hifi junk? What does that say about audiophiles?

View attachment 116198

Funny i have the same speakers sitting in one of my empty rooms upstairs, still functioning well, panels changed once, with a new spare set in its shipping box unopened. And a set of Primare 928 pre power-amps that i use every day with Sonus Faber speakers with my flatscreen, they are on maybe 5 hours every day ! Bought them new 1986, still sound amazing and i consider them audio art !