How to Revive High-End Audio

[Orb]

Actually, interestingly enough, I think our views are converging. I DON'T think prices are keeping people
away from the hobby.

It is a LACK OF INTEREST and the reason interest has not expanded is MUSICAL IN-CURIOSITY among current audiophiles.
which make it impossible for them to ever possibly mentor the uninitiated.

IF there is an interest in a household, then the inexpensive, high quality system is important because it gets them in the door.

You mentioned something about China in connection to entry level gear...which I really don't know how that ties in...

People buy $2000 Mac Book Pros made in China as well as $2000 TVs without blinking. Non factor IMO.

Andre you are spot on with it being a lack of interest but I would say it is specific to trend in society/habits; to the average consumer (talking about comparable to those consumers that would buy audio equipment in past) music is the interest but not the tools used to play it due to changes in society habits; mobility, ease of use and access to music, and critically how most listen to music these days in terms of listening focus.
They may care about quality of sound when it has been shown to them, but that quality of sound has to be brought into the above major criteria; hence why it is great to see some of the high ends making small/mobile use and competitively prices DACs to go with headsets and other components, high quality small speakers such as from KEF and a few others (although not mobile gives will pick the interest of those consumers), and of course products such as headphones.

We need to accept what is niche is how we "audiophiles"/hobbyists listen to music, it goes against the general trend of music consumers (including those with wealth); even traditional floorstander sized quality speakers IMO will become more niche as well along with the rest of traditional audio components, but there will still be enough interest for this to survive.

Look how much consumers (those that also buy and listen to music but do not buy traditional audio equipment) probably spend when considering their smartphone, a tablet/laptop/or both, headphone,small dac, next gen games console, moderately good flat screen TV, small separate speakers for TV/laptop/both,etc.
Consumers do have the cash to buy a good priced system, but as Andre says there just is no interest.

Now how the recent increase in LP interest may change this we will have to see, although what we are probably seeing are those that would be the next generation niche "audiophile"/hobbyist and willing to listen to music in a more traditional (and probably with a stronger focus-discipline listening approach such existing traditional listeners) but less flexible way.
The last comment in brackets is a bit too vague as I am sure there are those who use headphones or mobility and also are very intent on their listening focus/discipline.

So the trend will not change, just that the high end will need to appreciate the baseline figures will stabilise at a certain lower threshold (if lucky finally reached that point this year) for traditional hifi equipment, and so they may need to evolve to capture those others with a more "lifestyle"/desirable/etc product if intending to expand.
I would say we have seen more recently how some of the high end manufacturers have adapted to the change in habits, while others will look to try and gain/sustain current level of the niche base traditional audio consumer footprint.

Just my take anyway.
Cheers
Orb

 

[Andre Marc]

Andre you are spot on with it being a lack of interest but I would say it is specific to trend in society/habits; to the average consumer (talking about comparable to those consumers that would buy audio equipment in past) music is the interest but not the tools used to play it due to changes in society habits; mobility, ease of use and access to music, and critically how most listen to music these days in terms of listening focus.
They may care about quality of sound when it has been shown to them, but that quality of sound has to be brought into the above major criteria; hence why it is great to see some of the high ends making small/mobile use and competitively prices DACs to go with headsets and other components, high quality small speakers such as from KEF and a few others (although not mobile gives will pick the interest of those consumers), and of course products such as headphones.

We need to accept what is niche is how we "audiophiles"/hobbyists listen to music, it goes against the general trend of music consumers (including those with wealth); even traditional floorstander sized quality speakers IMO will become more niche as well along with the rest of traditional audio components, but there will still be enough interest for this to survive.

Look how much consumers (those that also buy and listen to music but do not buy traditional audio equipment) probably spend when considering their smartphone, a tablet/laptop/or both, headphone,small dac, next gen games console, moderately good flat screen TV, small separate speakers for TV/laptop/both,etc.
Consumers do have the cash to buy a good priced system, but as Andre says there just is no interest.

Now how the recent increase in LP interest may change this we will have to see, although what we are probably seeing are those that would be the next generation niche "audiophile"/hobbyist and willing to listen to music in a more traditional (and probably with a stronger focus-discipline listening approach such existing traditional listeners) but less flexible way.
The last comment in brackets is a bit too vague as I am sure there are those who use headphones or mobility and also are very intent on their listening focus/discipline.

So the trend will not change, just that the high end will need to appreciate the baseline figures will stabilise at a certain lower threshold (if lucky finally reached that point this year) for traditional hifi equipment, and so they may need to evolve to capture those others with a more "lifestyle"/desirable/etc product if intending to expand.
I would say we have seen more recently how some of the high end manufacturers have adapted to the change in habits, while others will look to try and gain/sustain current level of the niche base traditional audio consumer footprint.

Just my take anyway.
Cheers
Orb

Orb, you make some nice points.

The fact is there seems to be disposable income for a variety of things, but not some "weird" stereo equipment.

People at large of course enjoy music, but they are not willing to inconvenience them selves to listen to it
at what WE consider acceptable quality. The way it is being delivered to consumers is proof of that.

We also have to stop the myth and we can convert the "unwashed massed", those "poor unitiated souls" by simply exposing them
to a good system. I have done that countless times. They say "That was cool..thanks..." then never give it another thought.

It is no different than the small group who loves model trains or coin collecting. You could show me the coolest train set ever,
and I would have no interest in getting involved, and the owner of that train set probably is thinking how unsophisticated I am. LOL.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Very interesting question Micro..I don't believe there is.
Question, have you ever seen an add like this?

Would you like to hear your favorite albums the way the artists and producers intended?

Then may we suggest an alternative to this?:

Perhaps it's because it would be the worst thing you could do, IMO.

First, the trend now is to move toward streamed solutions rather than iTunes. It's still the largest elephant in the room, but there are some younger elephants (such as Grooveshark or Spotify) that just might grow into jumbos, and challenge iTunes dominance. In fact, many would argue that all of these formats are now mere handmaidens to the all-powerful YouTube. Latching on to iTunes shows just how removed we are from the modern reality of music lovers. But regardless, those who have been using iTunes for the last 10 years as their musical content provider are unlikely to take too well to being told just how wrong they are, and might well dismiss such claims as 'grandparental angst'.

We are failing to convince people at a grass-roots level that better sound is something to strive for, and that better sound can be had regardless of where those sounds come from. Yes, better signals begat better performance, but we need to convince people that there's more to life than iTunes by first convincing them how good most of their their iTunes purchases can be and that they weren't just dead dollars. Even if ultimately they come to that conclusion and repurchase all their music through something better.

We are already viewed as a bunch of elitist snobs. Driving people away from the way they have bought music for the last 10 years because "we know better" is going to cement that opinion. If anything, it drives a wedge between 'us' and 'them'.

 

[Andre Marc]

Perhaps it's because it would be the worst thing you could do, IMO.

First, the trend now is to move toward streamed solutions rather than iTunes. It's still the largest elephant in the room, but there are some younger elephants (such as Grooveshark or Spotify) that just might grow into jumbos, and challenge iTunes dominance. In fact, many would argue that all of these formats are now mere handmaidens to the all-powerful YouTube. Latching on to iTunes shows just how removed we are from the modern reality of music lovers. But regardless, those who have been using iTunes for the last 10 years as their musical content provider are unlikely to take too well to being told just how wrong they are, and might well dismiss such claims as 'grandparental angst'.

We are failing to convince people at a grass-roots level that better sound is something to strive for, and that better sound can be had regardless of where those sounds come from. Yes, better signals begat better performance, but we need to convince people that there's more to life than iTunes by first convincing them how good most of their their iTunes purchases can be and that they weren't just dead dollars. Even if ultimately they come to that conclusion and repurchase all their music through something better.

We are already viewed as a bunch of elitist snobs. Driving people away from the way they have bought music for the last 10 years because "we know better" is going to cement that opinion. If anything, it drives a wedge between 'us' and 'them'.

Alan, you completely misread the intention. By a country mile. I used iTunes as a template..

I can with great certainty assert that that my posting history shows that I am anti elitist snob..and I have suffered aggressive backlash for it.

Sorry, but I cannot agree that lossy streaming and files have any place in high end audio, you will notice I said HIGH END audio.
I have no issues with folks consuming music as they choose in their busy lives. But there is no point in having them invest in high
performance audio if lossy is more than good enough for them and owning music is of little importance.

We don't know better, but we DO know what IS better as far as quality of source.

Repurchase their music? Not in THIS life time, consumers have stopped purchasing music on a wide scale, aside from
people like me, the music nerds, who still spend boat loads of cash of hot new bands.

No, sorry Alan, you are off the mark here.

 

[Andre Marc]

Perhaps it's because it would be the worst thing you could do, IMO.

First, the trend now is to move toward streamed solutions rather than iTunes. It's still the largest elephant in the room, but there are some younger elephants (such as Grooveshark or Spotify) that just might grow into jumbos, and challenge iTunes dominance. In fact, many would argue that all of these formats are now mere handmaidens to the all-powerful YouTube. Latching on to iTunes shows just how removed we are from the modern reality of music lovers. But regardless, those who have been using iTunes for the last 10 years as their musical content provider are unlikely to take too well to being told just how wrong they are, and might well dismiss such claims as 'grandparental angst'.

We are failing to convince people at a grass-roots level that better sound is something to strive for, and that better sound can be had regardless of where those sounds come from. Yes, better signals begat better performance, but we need to convince people that there's more to life than iTunes by first convincing them how good most of their their iTunes purchases can be and that they weren't just dead dollars. Even if ultimately they come to that conclusion and repurchase all their music through something better.

We are already viewed as a bunch of elitist snobs. Driving people away from the way they have bought music for the last 10 years because "we know better" is going to cement that opinion. If anything, it drives a wedge between 'us' and 'them'.

P.S...telling folks they can better hear the intention of the artist via incremental upgrades to playback is hardly snobbery.

Blu Ray and HD Video have proven that folks DO want better quality WHEN IT MATTERS to them.

I know movie buffs who are on their 5th digital version of the Star Wars series because he version purports
to be closer the to original film print.

My father in law just told me he can no longer watch "standard resolution" TV after getting used to HD.
But he is more than happy to stream low bit mp3 and sometimes purchase music from iTunes. Priorities.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Sorry, but I cannot agree that lossy streaming and files have any place in high end audio, you will notice I said HIGH END audio.
I have no issues with folks consuming music as they choose in their busy lives. But there is no point in having them invest in high
performance audio if lossy is more than good enough for them and owning music is of little importance.

Then we lose. It's that simple.

Where we start from now is almost a nadir in music replay. We need to work with what they have, whatever it is, and build from there. If you start out saying lossy files have no place in high-end audio, all you do is disenfranchise 10 years worth of music lover who has been fed the line that lossy audio is all they need.

The head-fi people don't have any such problem with users of lossy files, because they know it's a short jump from 'I didn't know headphones could sound this good' to 'how much better would these headphones sound if I played them with lossless files?' These are the people who are buying Justin Timberlake albums on HD Tracks, and it's great they are coming on board. But, by saying 'lossy streaming and files have no place in high end audio', all you are saying is 'you have no place in high-end audio' to a generation by default. And that's a sure-fire way to kill off an industry.

I agree that many people will never be interested in any kind of audio that is better than the lowest common denominator, but not everyone. A generation has been sold the idea that 256kbps variable bit-rate AAC is as good as it gets, and by telling them there's nothing for them in high-end as a result, they just might end up believing you.

 

[Andre Marc]

Then we lose. It's that simple.

Where we start from now is almost a nadir in music replay. We need to work with what they have, whatever it is, and build from there. If you start out saying lossy files have no place in high-end audio, all you do is disenfranchise 10 years worth of music lover who has been fed the line that lossy audio is all they need.

The head-fi people don't have any such problem with users of lossy files, because they know it's a short jump from 'I didn't know headphones could sound this good' to 'how much better would these headphones sound if I played them with lossless files?' But, by saying 'lossy streaming and files have no place in high end audio', all you are saying is 'you have no place in high-end audio' to a generation by default. And that's a sure-fire way to kill off an industry.

I agree that many people will never be interested in any kind of audio that is better than the lowest common denominator, but not everyone. A generation has been sold the idea that 256kbps variable bit-rate AAC is as good as it gets, and by telling them there's nothing for them in high-end as a result, they just might end up believing you.

Alan, there is nothing for them here.

 

[mep]

Alan, there is nothing for them here.

That's one sad doom and gloom conclusion Andre. Either every country in the world is subsidizing the manufacture of high-end goods to offset the lack of sales, or people are actually buying the gear that is being made. There are probably more high-end companies making gear now than ever before in the history of the high-end. I couldn't possibly keep count of all of the companies that are currently in production and all of the products that each make. The number of brands and models of tables, tonearms, and cartridges alone is just staggering. I could go on and on. From entry level high-end to the top of high-end, people are buying gear. I'm not ready to attend a funeral for something that is alive and well.

 

[Alrainbow]

I have a great idea , since I own hi end but do not consider myself an audiophile . Ask me questions of why and how and what I think . I think I am more in touch with what is going on they people who are very evolved in the industry .

Just ask me some question now ?
Al

 

[Alrainbow]

I am an electrical contractor and do a fair amount of hi end renovations in NYC . You would be surmised at what I see.
I homes worth 20 m.

 

[still-one]

There are probably more high-end companies making gear now than ever before in the history of the high-end. I couldn't possibly keep count of all of the companies that are currently in production and all of the products that each make.

After spending time at another RMAF I am not sure if there are actually more high-end companies as you state. I do believe that there are more wanna-be high-end companies and believe that all they have to do is to price their products as such. There were plenty of products in the +$20k range that don't belong there.

 

[DaveyF]

I am an electrical contractor and do a fair amount of hi end renovations in NYC . You would be surmised at what I see.
I homes worth 20 m.

I think you mean "in" homes worth 20m. If so, I would agree with you, I see these types of homes as well and the gear ( or lack of) is pretty amazing. IME, most of the time I see multi HT systems with the typical mid-fi or worse gear as the backbone of the system. Not to say that the owner ( or more likely his "designer") didn't pay multiples of Thousand $$'s for it. OTOH, I also recently visited a non-audiophile home wherein the owner had gone to Best Buy/ Magnolia and they had sold him a full Mac system with B&W 802D's. This gent hadn't a clue what he had bought, except that it was sold to him as being the best due to the price and the fact that he had bought into the Magnolia sales talk. Hats off to Magnolia, IMHO. However, I suspect that the gent in question is probably not the typical Best Buy consumer ( due to his budget....or maybe not??)

 

[Alrainbow]

No doubt , there is plenty of money spent are very sub par for the buck equipment. No 2 speaker systems and if there is one it's small tower tiny .

But buckes spent on a total control of invirement control from lights to audio to HVAC . Complete with the touch pads . So complex I cannot imagine how many phone calls they must make. 200k lights . But sadly no 2 channel setups.
I have yet to see a all out 2 channel system.
Al.

 

[853guy]

P.S...telling folks they can better hear the intention of the artist via incremental upgrades to playback is hardly snobbery.

Blu Ray and HD Video have proven that folks DO want better quality WHEN IT MATTERS to them.

I know movie buffs who are on their 5th digital version of the Star Wars series because he version purports
to be closer the to original film print.

My father in law just told me he can no longer watch "standard resolution" TV after getting used to HD.
But he is more than happy to stream low bit mp3 and sometimes purchase music from iTunes. Priorities.

Dude, I've tried once, and failed.

But I'll try one more time:

The high-end as we know it today has reached saturation point, fuelled by a credit bubble that deluded people into thinking that money would always be available for purchasing and selling luxury goods (of which high-end hi-fi is unquestionably synonymous), and for funding companies to design, manufacture and market five- and six- figure products. The question remains, how many of those companies will still be solvent in five years time and how much cheap and easy credit pre-2008 will still be available to fuel purchases and/or keep companies afloat?

Personally, I think those days are over. The credit bubble burst, if I remember rightly.

You mention flat screens and Blu-Ray and that people buy them because they want better "quality" and use that as an argument that surely those same people must be able to fund purchase of a high-end system (though I can't work out how a $3K system is "high end". Mid-fi, possibly.). Unfortunately, you neglect the following:

Consumers buy large flat screens and Blu-Ray players because they use the most base of instincts when buying (mostly from large franchised retailers). That is, they want to know, A) Is it bigger/brighter/bolder/more feature-laden than what they previously owned, and B) Can I get it on credit? Flat screen sales are almost never at full retail price and almost always done on credit, where the store has an aggressive "easy to own" credit facility. Once "purchased", they can watch sport, news, cable, satellite, DVD, Blu-Ray, downloaded and pirated material and porn on them. The can hook up their Wii, X-Box or a PS3. They can view their garish family snaps of their credit-card purchased trip to Vegas. The blow-back should the consumer default on their instalments is distilled by the sheer volume of sales and the amount of mark-up inherent in the bulk-purchasing agreement the retailer has with the distributor.

Hi-fi is the opposite. When buying a high-end hi-fi system you're supposed to sit down for two hours straining to hear differences between products that are subtle ("incremental") at best and unprovable in a double blind test as worst. Asking your local hi-fi shop if they have an easy to tap into credit line for $25K with no money down is going to result in a firm "no". That pair of speakers may be the only pair they have in stock. No high-end retailer can afford to take back a pair of "lightly-used" Sonus Faber's and make any sort of profit on them once the time and energy of the sales person's efforts are taken into consideration during the auditioning, installing and set-up process. Not only that, you need to tell the purchaser the CD player only plays CDs. The streamer only does certain files and requires a high-end USB cable. No, sorry, it's not compatible with iTunes. SACD is another story altogether, and the turntable will require regular maintenance of its belt, stylus and records, not to mention adjusting VTA depending on whether you're playing 180gm or regular vinyl.

The consumers who buy flat screen TV's from massive chain stores are not the same people willing to go through the latter process to achieve something incrementally better than what they already have in their cars, boats and Bose Sound Docks. Those guys with massive subs in their cars and a 7.1 system would already consider themselves music lovers. Music is a priority, which is why they own all of Nickelback's albums. It has nothing to do with better quality or "priorities", and everything to do with convenience and ease of access to cheap credit. It's easy to go and buy a 60" flat screen. You can have the worst credit rating in history and you'll still be able to buy one reduced in half from when it first went on sale. The salesman will make his or her commission and never have to deal with you again. Trying to sell someone on a hi-fi system of diminishing returns where their credit line is substantially over-extended is already at saturation point, and as we all know, in decline. We, here, are in the tiny, tiny minority who believe it might worth it, though personally, I've cut all my credit cards in half.

So if your strategy is to get people from the middle classes down to their local hi-fi store to bolster the ranks and then inform them "Dude, all that music you bought from iTunes will sound like utter crap on this $25K system", you send a mixed message at odds with your initially trumpeted (and highly laudable) statement about putting the horse before the cart. So what is it? Getting people into music or alienating them with a high-bar that renders their music collection redundant?

Personally, I'm with Mr. Sircom, and not for the first time.

P.S. Maybe Star Wars geeks keep buying newer "improved" versions of the films because they're Star Wars geeks and will buy the newer "improved" version of the films simply because George Lucas keeps releasing them.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Blu Ray and HD Video have proven that folks DO want better quality WHEN IT MATTERS to them.

As a Moderator on Blu-ray.com I can vouch for this. Although they are primarily movie fans, for many the audio portion plays an equal role and they are investing more and more on that side. Although the majority of them don't invest in truly high-end gear (some do and have), the investment in better equipment has given them more of an appreciation for music as well. I see many members there getting into HD Tracks, SACD and vinyl as a compliment to their HT experience. They are excited about music!

 

[still-one]

853guy

Although I don't agree with everything in your post I think you have stated the issue rather nicely. Well done.

 

[mep]

maybe there is also a "good enough" factor here. for those not hobbyists in any area, then "good enough" is, well, "good enough". Mid-Fi (if you say $3K) is certainly good enough. Its those who chase the diminishing returns in form of ego massaging, or specifications, or artistic looks, or even performance (and strategically important....as measured against their preference(s).

for the "good enough" thoughts, maintenance is a BIG factor. decades ago, we bought this german clock with nearly fully visible "works" inside. It was expensive "for just a clock" but it was cool looking. well, after about 3 years of use, the thing quit working, seems the grease or oil they use requires the clock to be at the clock fixers place every two years for re-oiling or whatever. so, ever since, never again, do we purchase a stupid "clock" that needs re-curring maintenance like that. It sets down at the bottom of a piece of furniture collecting dust and has escaped the dust bin by the skin of its teeth quite a few times just because it cost so much to start with. now, a clock lover who is a hobbyist or specialist in clocks, well they would love to have it and nurture it and wind it and even probably do the oil routine on it themselves every two years.....


sometimes "good enough" becomes irrelavent....can anyone say wrist watches? I dont see anyone under 300 or maybe 40 with a wrist watch anymore since their phone has it all+++including OMG...music....

Good thing you don't any stupid tube amps that need to have the bias set periodically or tubes replaced at some point in time because they would probably be sitting next to your German clock waiting to go the trash heap.

 

[andromedaaudio]

HMMM ... I do consider blu ray and big modern flatscreens high end
How to revive high end ,,???
Blow more hot air into it

 

[Alan Sircom]

Alan, there is nothing for them here.

You presume both too much and too little of the music lover. Domestic music technology currently flies very low under the radar. For example, there is almost no coverage of High Definition Audio in the mainstream or tech CES reports, aside from a page on Fox News' website. It's entirely possible for the music loving proto-audiophile to be an iTunes user because it is a step up from low-rate Deezer or Last.FM streams and is considered 'CD quality'. That doesn't make them a knuckle-dragging philistine, it makes them a 2014 version of me when I was about 18.

There's also an over-exaggeration about just how bad MP3 and AAC can be in audiophile circles. We tend to conflate signal compression with data reduction, and dismiss both as the Big Bad. Yes, the ideal is freedom from lossy compression, but MP3 and AAC can sound OK too. Those who experience these lossy formats on a good system will frequently discover OK isn't OK enough and migrate away from lossy compression, but if we tell those same people to basically 'move along' at the outset, that will never happen. And ultimately, it's their choice to make, not ours - if someone extracts more musical enjoyment from playing their MP3s through a good system, more power to them. I might recommend they make the move to lossless 16/44 PCM or high-resolution PCM or DSD files, but if they conclude they are happy with what they have, why is that a bad thing?

Perhaps unintentionally, there is a rift between today's music lover and audiophiles and their dealers. By dismissing their choice of music format out of hand, our condescending attitude alienates those music lovers who might want to experience excellent sound. This also acts as kindling for the "I don't get out of bed for less than $50k" mouth-breathing audiophile dealer who views everyone with distain, but everyone with iTunes as being beneath contempt. Perhaps the worst thing about this kind of dealer is they unfairly tar good dealers with guilt by association. This needs to end, and end fast.

It needs to end because I am not sure how well audio will survive with just a high-end. It needs bandwidth, because it needs people who start small, but think big to grow over time, as well as pre-configured wealthy people with hundreds of thousands burning a hole in their pocket. And right now, those who start small start on lossy compressed files. Without people crossing over from lossy downloads and streaming to discover a wider world of audio, good audio remains just with the carriage trade. I'd hate to think we destroy much of good audio on my watch for the sake of not wishing to dirty our hands with MP3.

 

[Lee]

You presume both too much and too little of the music lover. Domestic music technology currently flies very low under the radar. For example, there is almost no coverage of High Definition Audio in the mainstream or tech CES reports, aside from a page on Fox News' website. It's entirely possible for the music loving proto-audiophile to be an iTunes user because it is a step up from low-rate Deezer or Last.FM streams and is considered 'CD quality'. That doesn't make them a knuckle-dragging philistine, it makes them a 2014 version of me when I was about 18.

There's also an over-exaggeration about just how bad MP3 and AAC can be in audiophile circles. We tend to conflate signal compression with data reduction, and dismiss both as the Big Bad. Yes, the ideal is freedom from lossy compression, but MP3 and AAC can sound OK too. Those who experience these lossy formats on a good system will frequently discover OK isn't OK enough and migrate away from lossy compression, but if we tell those same people to basically 'move along' at the outset, that will never happen. And ultimately, it's their choice to make, not ours - if someone extracts more musical enjoyment from playing their MP3s through a good system, more power to them. I might recommend they make the move to lossless 16/44 PCM or high-resolution PCM or DSD files, but if they conclude they are happy with what they have, why is that a bad thing?

Perhaps unintentionally, there is a rift between today's music lover and audiophiles and their dealers. By dismissing their choice of music format out of hand, our condescending attitude alienates those music lovers who might want to experience excellent sound. This also acts as kindling for the "I don't get out of bed for less than $50k" mouth-breathing audiophile dealer who views everyone with distain, but everyone with iTunes as being beneath contempt. Perhaps the worst thing about this kind of dealer is they unfairly tar good dealers with guilt by association. This needs to end, and end fast.

It needs to end because I am not sure how well audio will survive with just a high-end. It needs bandwidth, because it needs people who start small, but think big to grow over time, as well as pre-configured wealthy people with hundreds of thousands burning a hole in their pocket. And right now, those who start small start on lossy compressed files. Without people crossing over from lossy downloads and streaming to discover a wider world of audio, good audio remains just with the carriage trade. I'd hate to think we destroy much of good audio on my watch for the sake of not wishing to dirty our hands with MP3.

Well said Alan.