Is High End Audio Gear Worth the Money?

[Rensselaer]

If the question was, is gold worth the money? Would your answer still be, to some it is?
In our global economy, value is determined by the market, not by one’s personal preferences.
If I choose to buy something or not, the value of that product does not change.

The point is hifi gear is worth it because a market exists for it.

Perhaps you would argue that you can walk into a store and bargain for a better price with the sales person. You walk out of the store with your purchase feeling good about making a great deal. Then you go online and see the average selling price for your purchase is exactly what you paid.

If you say, that product is not worth it to me. Again, that is a personal decision and does not affect market value. Now if no one is willing to purchase a particular product at a given price, then the market value must be adjusted. Turntables are a good example. By 2000 turntable values were at their lowest. Some great hifi turntables could be had for some bargain prices. These days turntables are more expensive than ever.

What are you saying? I said the price of high end equipment “is worth it” to “some” people. That simply implies that to “some” people, it is not.

You ask me “if the question was, is gold worth the money?” What are you trying to say? I have no idea what my view that high end is worth the price to some (meaning not all) people has to do with the trading value of gold. Please explain your gold reference.

You then say that the high cost of high-end gear is worth it “because a market for it exists”.

The fact that “some” people are willing and able to spend large sums on gear, [some of which has been proven to be bettered by much less expensive equipment (see atmasphere #38 above)], doesn’t say that the high prices are justified, but perhaps suggests validity to those sayings of P.T. Barnum when he said “no man ever went broke overestimating the ignorance of the American public”, and “you can fool most of the people most of the time”.

 

[Kingrex]

Your post explains that your value system is tuned into driving low-slung fast cars. I have zero interest in driving cars fast, so neither a Porsche nor Aston interests me.

About 6 months ago we took a short break that included 3 or 4 days in a place called Roncolo 1888, about 20 miles from Maranello. There were two brothers and their sons staying in the hotel. They were on a Ferrari-related trip, as they had matching cars in the car park, about $750,000 each. At dinner every night it seemed to be a lot of car chat mixed with a bit of opera. They obviously got a lot of pleasure out of their cars and they bonded over them as a family. What they knew about their cars and how they drove them, I have no idea. They certainly weren't stupid.

We've been to the Ferrari museum in Maranello with the kids and had a great time. I was more impressed by the Italian Automobile Museum in Turin. If I had the money, I'd have one of those things as a work of art and put it in my living room. However, even if you buy a Ferrari just to look at it, with fuel added the performance is a given.

There are a lot of similarities with audio, except the marginal returns diminish at a much lower point and the performance is not a given. If you make $0.5m or $1m supercars and their performance is poor, your business will fail. This is proven. There seem to be quite a few audio products that do not seem to be value, not because of their price, but because at that price they should perform a lot better. That said, if an amplifier sounds lousy but someone wants to spend six figures just to look at it as a piece of industrial art, then that's their choice.

I doubt most people understand the performance of their stereo. If it makes no hum and plays loud, they think its great.

 

[Atmasphere]

Does he let his family / friends look at it?

No, not without some real cajoling.

Interesting points:

The first asserts that there is no correlation between price and performance. It also suggests that if you are convinced to spend more than $125.00 a DAC (price of the Topping D30) then you are getting ripped off. (Oh, and thank you greatly for sharing this insight in order to help your fellow audiophiles who might not be as wealthy, experienced or knowledgeable, such is the reason why I follow this site).

The second makes me think about all those who have asserted digital superiority over analogue because of “accuracy”, that what was recorded is recovered absolutely intact. Well then, if the signal from the digital source is 100% accurately converted to analogue, why do you hear differences between DACs (all else being equal)?

There is only a correlation between price and performance (and sonic quality) sometimes. That's as accurate about this as you can be.

Different DACs perform differently and then you have to get the signal to the real world using some kind of gain buffer (the raw DAC signal tends to be at a low level). Some use tubes for this, others use opamps, as examples. They are certainly going to sound different even with the same DAC circuits.

To get the closest approximation of that live performance, I will need the best sounding system I can afford.

Actually to get the closest approximation of that live performance what you need is the best sounding system. It might be quite affordable or it may not. No-one knows. But if you are careful, for not a lot of money you can do quite well for yourself; well within the 1% region of the very best if price is no object.

In radio parlance this is known as 'gold plated deciBels' since it costs so much more to raise transmitter coverage by 3 dB.

 

[TonyW]

You ask me “if the question was, is gold worth the money?” What are you trying to say? I have no idea what my view that high end is worth the price to some (meaning not all) people has to do with the trading value of gold. Please explain your gold reference.

Obviously.

You want so much to believe that expensive hifi is a sham that you will desperately grab onto any sound bite that proves your point. Instead of saying, Ha! gotcha! regarding the cheap DAC, you should be asking why. Why would the cheap DAC sound better than an expensive tube DAC?What are the conditions of the system in which both were used? Is the tube DAC being correctly applied- ie clean power, right cables, good tubes, etc. Is the DAC performing to spec?

But rather than banter about how something I've never heard sounds, logic and experience says the more expensive, better built DAC should sound better. If not then it is an aberration. And what should follow is an investigation into the application of the tube DAC and comparisons to other quality DACs.

If, as you say people of means are being duped into buying expensive audio gear because they "think" they hear some differences then you really need to ask yourself these questions because to assume people of means, powerful people, people who are likely very smart and detailed about their finances would foolishly spend excess money on audio gear- well that path of thinking is folly.

Why would a rich and powerful person who loves music spend large sums on a system that they find unlistenable or is not what it seems?
Yes, I have heard expensive systems over the years that sounded pretty bad. I have heard cheap systems that sounded pretty bad. But I have never heard a cheap system that sounds so good I can't stop listening to it. Most of the systems that I have heard over the years that captivated me were expensive but not in the ultra expensive range. That's where I am now. I lost a day yesterday because I turned my stereo on in the morning. What I mean is no yard work got done, didn't wash the car like I planned. That rotten stereo kept me in my seat for hours.

What happens when people find out that a particular audio component is not what it seems?
The Market reacts. HiFi depends on pedigree and integrity. If someone breaks those bonds of trust the damage is irreparable. I agree that expensive cables are a minefield. So many brands and choices to navigate through. I learned best to borrow and try them out at home. I stick to brands with pedigree. Caveat Emptor.

Why do certain brands hold their value in the used market?
We enjoy a lot of high quality, great sounding hifi gear these days. Perhaps more than ever these days. It's easy to scan the web and see what used gear is popular and holds its value. That makes cost of ownership more favorable when we decide to upgrade. Finding a bargain for a new piece of gear usually ends up not being much of a bargain.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Another: Topping has been making a very decent line of DACs for some years now. A few years back we had their cheapest one at the time, the D30 ($125.00 including shipping at the time), in the shop and had opportunity to compare it directly to a tubed DAC that cost over $4000.00. The Topping was smoother, more detailed, not bright (like the other was), played bass beautifully and generally was easy to listen to while the other was not.

My conclusion is simply that the tubed DAC sounded very poor in the system, not that the Topping was a great DAC ...

A friend has brought a Topping DAC ( I do not know the model, they have many types ) costing around 500 euros in my system and it was nothing special.

Their more expensive DACs are better and no-one likes to talk about it, but if you have a recording in digital format that you know really well (in my case because I recorded it) then if you're being honest you realize that Topping is delivering on what digital has been promising but falling short of for many years.

Sorry, but IMO a particular recording does not prove anything. Can you give us some details on the recording?

 

[Atmasphere]

Sorry, but IMO a particular recording does not prove anything. Can you give us some details on the recording?

I can. One I like to play is called Canto General; a musical version of Pablo Neruda's epic poem. It was conducted by Mikas Theodorakis (the composer) and Stefan Skold. When setting up the performance, I asked the producer to get the biggest bass drum they could find in the state, which they did. The piece is written for choir. soloists, two pianos, a substantial percussion section, flutes (including bass flute) and guitars. Its done with two Neumann mics in an omni pattern. No compression or processing; straight to tape (updated Ampex 354 tube machine) and the LP and CD are mastered from the master tape.

It was recorded in O'Shaughnessy Hall on the College of St. Catherine in St. Paul. Its a hall I know well; I've played there, seen the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra there as well as the Minnesota Orchestra.

Boston Public Radio did a broadcast of the LP on the day of Theodorakis' birthday, which resulted in the LP selling out. Every now and then a copy shows up on ebay or discogs. Its a three LP set with libretto.

Having been there and having the master tapes helps me know how a system is doing.

My conclusion is simply that the tubed DAC sounded very poor in the system, not that the Topping was a great DAC ...

FWIW, the Topping DACs measure extremely well. So the real question is how do they sound? Knowing the recordings as I do, i can see its neutral. It doesn't add anything nor does it take anything away. Its not bright so I can play it all day and it challenges any LP rig I've seen. There seem to be three levels- entry, which I think is the E30 these days, the mid line (D50, which allows for Bluetooth) and the D90. I have the D90SE, which has balanced outputs. When I bought it they were about $900 retail.

If you really want to know what they are about, like most things audiophile you have to do a side by side comparison. I find the differences between it and DACs that cost into 5 figures to be quie small. I still prefer my turntable though and to put that in perspective one of the best DAC and transport combos I heard was in our room at RMAF and cost about $70,000.00. This is a setup that was marketed by Purist Audio and those of you who know Albert Porter may recall he really liked this system (Stahltek). The designer was in the room and we were playing a track by Massive Attack. I mentioned I had the LP so he was interested in comparing. After about 5 seconds he turned to me and said "Digital has such a long way to go!"

I think it has come a long way. The Topping stuff was not around back then (about 10-12 years ago) but it is now. IMO it represents a bargain and a bar that other manufacturers really have to consider.

 

[Kingrex]

Tony, that is exactly what I mean. Hooking up the cables correctly is only the beginning it is not anything more than that.
Understanding what is possible and how the room and the speakers interact and how to get the best from this is IMO the most important part of getting the music to be special. The recipe for success is not as simple as hooking things up correctly.
What I don't understand is how so many spend so much and are satisfied with the bare minimum.
You can give me the same kitchen and the recipe but I seriously doubt I can cook like Thomas Keller, maybe I could get lucky. The overwhelming number of rooms I go into and systems I hear and not installed and set up even close to their max. I find this sad since they have spent the money and yet they refuse to finish the job for some reason.
I believe that this is the High Ends fatal flaw and something that the Industry for the most part refuses to acknowledge and discuss.
If you need proof just go to any show, some can and most can't that is just the facts.

Totally get what you are saying. But it's means nothing. I say that as Audiophiles are not trained to set up equipment. Heck, plenty get the phase backwards when hooking up cables. And you expect them to somehow understand how to set a speaker in a room. Come on. Not going to happen. That means the wagon of upgrade itous lives strong as nothing will reach the panicle. It can't. Not when its installed wrong.

And how good a setup do dealers perform? I bet the homeowner points his finger at a corner, or a designer says they go there. And that's where they end up.

 

[Atmasphere]

Heck, plenty get the phase backwards when hooking up cables.

I've done that so many times... sheesh

 

[TonyW]

Totally get what you are saying. But it's means nothing. I say that as Audiophiles are not trained to set up equipment. Heck, plenty get the phase backwards when hooking up cables. And you expect them to somehow understand how to set a speaker in a room. Come on. Not going to happen. That means the wagon of upgrade itous lives strong as nothing will reach the panicle. It can't. Not when its installed wrong.

And how good a setup do dealers perform? I bet the homeowner points his finger at a corner, or a designer says they go there. And that's where they end up.

Setting up speakers in a room is hard. I give you that. It takes me months or before I retired a year or more. This last time as I treated the room and adjusted speaker position I learned some things and now I think I could do in a week or so. I doubt I could ever do it in a day.

I was down to 1/8" increments and keeping a log per the Wilson's WASP method. My eureka moment which even after a couple of years I am excited about was fixing a "hole" in the bass. A small range of frequencies that I could hear standing up but not when I sat down. That drove me crazy for so long- and even went back to my previous speakers and to my previous home. The issue was centerline distance between speakers. Move the speakers too far apart or too close together and the hole was there. The difference I'm talking about is less than an inch. Now I can sit or stand anywhere in my room and the bass sounds the same.

I had forgotten about that hole for a few years until I was listening to a great system at a B&M store in Atlanta. Good setup. I had them play some of my songs and there it was- the bass I was looking for. Went home and started scratching my head. It wasn't until I bought my current speakers and kept fiddling with speaker position that I finally found it.

 

[Elliot G.]

Totally get what you are saying. But it's means nothing. I say that as Audiophiles are not trained to set up equipment. Heck, plenty get the phase backwards when hooking up cables. And you expect them to somehow understand how to set a speaker in a room. Come on. Not going to happen. That means the wagon of upgrade itous lives strong as nothing will reach the panicle. It can't. Not when its installed wrong.

And how good a setup do dealers perform? I bet the homeowner points his finger at a corner, or a designer says they go there. And that's where they end up.

if it means nothing then as a whole its all being done wrong. There is a race to the bottom in audio where only the price counts and it is that race that has caused IMO the very issues that you speak about. That is not however how I approach my business, my customers and my own system.
I think that lots of audiophiles say they know how and some probably do but most do not. I don't believe that most dealers can either however part of the fault comes from the buyers who either won't let them set them up or want deep deals so the dealer is not going to do the work.

I ask this are you prepared and willing to pay someone for this service? IMO its not really part of buying a box anymore than a supermarket is supposed to cook your meal. Installation and set up are skills that are learned and practiced by some and they can do it if they are hired and allowed to do such.
I can promise you that there are people that can make your system do things you can't. So before you buy that next box maybe its time to invest in that I believe its well worth your while.

 

[thedudeabides]

Yes, I have heard expensive systems over the years that sounded pretty bad. I have heard cheap systems that sounded pretty bad. But I have never heard a cheap system that sounds so good I can't stop listening to it. Most of the systems that I have heard over the years that captivated me were expensive but not in the ultra expensive range.

Please define cheap, expensive and ultra expensive and the "basis" for the cost. MSRP, new with dealer discount, store demo, store trade in or used (audiogon) market price? And I assume you are talking "total" cost. Correct?

 

[Atmasphere]

A small range of frequencies that I could hear standing up but not when I sat down. That drove me crazy for so long- and even went back to my previous speakers and to my previous home. The issue was centerline distance between speakers. Move the speakers too far apart or too close together and the hole was there. The difference I'm talking about is less than an inch. Now I can sit or stand anywhere in my room and the bass sounds the same.

That's caused by a Standing Wave just so you know. You can mess with it a bit by speaker placement but really all that happens is it moves to a different place or different frequency. To really fix it (so you have even bass all about the room) you need to add subwoofers to break up the standing waves.

Four is ideal, asymmetrically placed. If your main speakers already do the deep bass you may only need two. Since the mains at that point are probably out in front of you the two subs should be asymmetrically placed, perhaps to one side and one in the rear. Audiokinesis makes (reasonably priced) passive subs for just this purpose; they are meant to be placed as close to a wall as you can get them since they take advantage of the room boundary effect which adds 3dB per octave as you go down. So they roll off 3dB/octave, resulting in flat response at 20Hz in a compact enclosure.

 

[TonyW]

Please define cheap, expensive and ultra expensive.

Cheap= mid fi, mass produced gear with low cost componentry inside.
Expensive= esoteric gear typically hand assembled with above average to top line componentry.
Ultra expensive= 100 times the price of low end mass produced gear of like kind. Hand built, sorted componentry, tweaked and tuned to very tight specifications.

Eg. My new SR Ethernet Switch UEF MkII costs 100x more than a basic ethernet switch. That makes it ultra expensive in my mind. Now I just realized my speakers cost 100x a basic pair of speakers. So my speakers are ultra expensive. I thought that $150k or more for speakers was ultra expensive. In other words, I thought ultra expensive is anything more expensive than what I own.

So you see how we are like frogs in a pot of water that is slowly being brought to boil.

 

[Elliot G.]

When I really was in the early years of Audio we sold Magnepan. They had speakers that were 500- 1400 dollars a pair. They required set up since people had no clue what to do with these things that looked like dressing screens or a door. Magnepan had a program for the sales people to set up the speakers in clients homes and they had a reward type program. We were a top level dealer for them for a long time. You couldn't give this to a guy to take home by himself they would return it by sticking it in a corner or against the wall. You needed to learn how to set them up it was a necessity. I did a few hundred of these exercises along with many other speakers, especially large ones over the years including many of the IRS, Infinity Betas, Maggies, Acoustats, Dahlquists, Focals ( even taught them how to set them up) Magico, Wilson and of course Gobel.
That process is not a part of business today in a lot of places with any brand. I realize that many people just want what they want stuck where they want them.
I do not know how many of you buy and from where but my question is when you buy speakers do you discuss having them delivered and set up by your dealer or by a professional?

 

[cjfrbw]

I know an audiophile that owns a Porsche and he's afraid to sit in it let alone drive it.

Might be a wise policy. A woman my wife worked with had a husband who saved for years to buy a particular high end Porsche. I gather he never learned how to drive one first. He cracked it up the first time driving it on Foothill Road and wound up paralyzed aka no more driving any car.

Sometimes we have to restrain our anticipation of the joys of the veblens.

I can assemble a good sounding system cheap now with the knowledge obtained from buying all kinds of expensive and not expensive stuff over the years. The education was expensive, though, but part of the 'journey'. The process of elimination isn't cheap, but the temptations are too great to avoid.

I'm fine with the array of expensive craft objects by the devoted artisans. I'm not so convinced they automatically produce a desired result, but, man oh man, the looks, the edifice, the gleaming spires of magnificence, the eye candy, the jewelry, the slack, dropped jaws upon entering the chapels of high end consumerism, the pride of ownership, the imagined paroxysms of envy from the beholders, the exclusivity, the polished sheens, the one upsmanship, the raw awe of big buck expenditures! The never ending PROMISE. Priceless.

My current system is a composite of experience, a bit crazy, in many ways non-commercial, but it makes me very happy and I haven't heard enough at the various venues to make me want to change.

 

[DasguteOhr]

Before you buy a Porsche, you should book a driver training course. Porsche offers this at its experience centers. Perhaps you'll then decide on a different model that you're happy with and experience the best driving pleasure. It's definitely cheaper and safer for you.

Porsche Track Experience Precision

Control the uncontrollable. Optimize precision and technique. Master dangerous situations with confidence. Experience: driving pleasure.

www.porsche-leipzig.com

 

[Holmz]

Totally get what you are saying. But it's means nothing. I say that as Audiophiles are not trained to set up equipment. Heck, plenty get the phase backwards when hooking up cables. And you expect them to somehow understand how to set a speaker in a room. Come on. Not going to happen. …

A large percentage of speakers have the phase/polarity backwards.
How do we reconcile that?

 

[thedudeabides]

So you see how we are like frogs in a pot of water that is slowly being brought to boil.

In your previous post, you used the descriptor "system" to describe hierarchy (I assume commensurate with an increase in audio quality) and long term listenability. In your recent post, you used the 100X cost ratio to describe your SR switch which would place it, per your definition, in your ultra expensive category. That implies to me that you believe cost determines whether a system falls into the cheap, expensive or ultra expensive category and determines its long term listenability. Did I misunderstand or do you think cost has little relationship to system performance and long term listening? Or maybe it's a depends? Thanks.

BTW, love your frog analogy although I totally disagree with the underlying premise / logic.

 

[TonyW]

In your previous post, you used the descriptor "system" to describe hierarchy (I assume commensurate with an increase in audio quality) and long term listenability. In your recent post, you used the 100X cost ratio to describe your SR switch which would place it, per your definition, in your ultra expensive category. That implies to me that you believe cost determines whether a system falls into the cheap, expensive or ultra expensive category and determines its long term listenability. Did I misunderstand or do you think cost has little relationship to system performance and long term listening? Or maybe it's a depends? Thanks.

BTW, love your frog analogy although I totally disagree with the underlying premise / logic.

The frog analogy applies to me because had I known how much I would spend- how far down the rabbit hole I would go four years ago I would have likely not changed/upgraded my audio system. I'm glad I did because I love the sound but I could never have imagined myself investing so heavily into this system like I did.

Expensive is solely about cost. Performance is a different issue. If we can agree that better quality components, such as capacitors, resistors, wiring cost more, then the next step is agree that these high quality components assembled into amps, speakers, DACs and turntables result in better sound. My cousin refurbishes speakers as a hobby. He knows first hand how the quality of the speaker crossover capacitors affects the sound. I have rebuilt speaker crossovers myself in the past with good results.

The cooking analogy is a good one. Ingredients are only one part of the recipe. How and when the ingredients are mixed together matter and then the cooking process or assembly and test matters. Better ingredients typically yields better results. Good process controls yield better results. This isn't just true for a speaker or amplifier but applies to the whole audio system as well. Better speakers, amps sources, cables and room design results in better sound- generally. Do one thing wrong and the sound might get worse. Frustration, anger and the temptation to buy headphones is the result.

Completely agree that cost to performance is not a perfect 1.0 correlation. Too many factors contribute to the success of an audio system. A few years ago I found my DAC (not my current one) was too bright, the highs too harsh. I had a power conditioner, I had room treatments but still, too many songs were just not listenable above moderate volume. I bought a better power cord for the DAC and suddenly the highs sounded wonderful. I found I could play the music louder. The whole system affected by a single power cord. People have different experiences with the same gear but we never really know the context. I could have blamed my DAC or my speakers. But experience and reviews of that DAC said otherwise. I also knew it wasn't the speakers because I play vinyl too. I gave the power cord a try and was amazed. That's something five years ago I would have flat out refused to believe.

 

[TonyW]

In your previous post, you used the descriptor "system" to describe hierarchy (I assume commensurate with an increase in audio quality) and long term listenability. In your recent post, you used the 100X cost ratio to describe your SR switch which would place it, per your definition, in your ultra expensive category. That implies to me that you believe cost determines whether a system falls into the cheap, expensive or ultra expensive category and determines its long term listenability. Did I misunderstand or do you think cost has little relationship to system performance and long term listening? Or maybe it's a depends? Thanks.

BTW, love your frog analogy although I totally disagree with the underlying premise / logic.

And another thing...

Can I say that my new Ethernet Switch "sounds" 100 times better than a basic $30 network switch? That is an emphatic yes! Is it 5 times better than my LHY network switch? I'd say it is close. Could I go back to the LHY switch? No. Had to do that for 5 days after returning the loaner SR switch and while waiting for my new SR switch to arrive. Made me appreciate the SR switch even more. Another thing just a few years ago i wouldn't believe.

Streaming has come a long way. Spent a lot of hours researching and trying things that didn't work so well. Now I can stream for hours enjoying a nearly endless selection of music. It's all been so worth it for me. I get more use out of this stereo than anything else. I'm listening to Norah Jones right now. Fantastic. I like her earlier albums best.