Is it "whats best forum" , or what's more expensive

[mbovaird]

Jim - it's not about purchasing what's the most expensive, its about finding gear you really like. I've maintained that someone could buy a pair of Revel Salon 2's, a pair of Classe CA-M600's and a Classe CP-800 (or Pass preamp), throw in a Mac Mini running Audirvana+ and they achieve audio nirvana for the price of a Burmester amp or less. There are people I know who gauge everything by price and its very difficult not to fall into that trap. Years ago (pre-internet) we were much more ignorant to the vast amount of gear that was out there. We went to our local dealer(s), listened for ourselves and made decisions we were usually happy with. Today, gear has reached the uber expensive category.

A perfect example of what you're talking about is cables. I refuse to fall for $20,000 cables. They may sound different, but not necessarily better. I had expensive cables in my system (thinking this was the way to go) and they were a mixture of silver and copper. After several months, I wanted to poke my eyes out (or ears out!). I couldn't stand the sound. It was like the tweeters were in turbo mode all the time. Even after what was supposed to be break in - they still drove me nuts. Better because they cost more? Not even close. Today, I'm happy - VERY HAPPY - with regular old WW Eclipse 6. I've tried many other cables, but for me, these sound the best and they are no where near the most expensive. Others will obviously have different experiences...but thats mine.

Here's another example: in a blind fold test a few months ago with three audiophile friends, not ONE could tell the difference between the Classe CP-800 preamp (price paid: $3400) and the McIntosh C1000C/P preamp (price paid: $16,000). They sounded IDENTICAL.

I've often told friends, listen without knowing the price. You may just surprise yourself. If the one you choose is too expensive, then keep looking....but you really may surprise yourself.

Although I've never owned any of their gear, IMO, Burmester gear is the most overpriced stuff on the planet. Friends who have had their gear often sell it with a real bitter taste in their mouths. Sounds like this is kind of what started you off too....no?

Mike

 

[opus111]

I've maintained that someone could buy a pair of Revel Salon 2's, a pair of Classe CA-M600's and a Classe CP-800 (or Pass preamp), throw in a Mac Mini running Audirvana+ and they achieve audio nirvana for the price of a Burmester amp or less.

With the DAC chips used in the CP-800 being roughly iPod quality (WM8741) this does look to me to be a curious way to distribute one's budget

 

[Shaffer]

PLEASE, take this as a personal journey, and not as an attack. I sold some very expensive gear ($32K Burmester 911 MK3 and $18K GNSC Wadia S7i). I look at some of the SOTA prices and cringe. Not because I can't afford it (I can), but because I seriously wonder about the bang for the buck factor. I kept my $24K Concert Fidelity pre and $27K Venture speakers, but sold my amp amp and source, and went downtown and bout an Oppo 105 and an ATI amp. But, you know what? I felt a 10% decline for a 1000% savings. Do not get me wrong, I greatly appreciate the SOTA, but wallet is my new sphincter muscle. Why even start this thread? Because I see an alarming tread at CES and the new prices of gear, considering this economy. If I am wrong, sorry for your time.

Edit: This is in reference to "Ultra High End" article. Nothing more, nothing less.

The price of new gear only has true relevance, if one is hoping to buy it. Personally, I think that listening to audio equipment as a hobby is, well, stupid (I'm not discounting the efforts of those who review and inform the public). There was a time when we all had record collections, we all played the recordings, and we all wanted to hear them "better." Somehow that same act got translated/evolved into listening to gear with the music serving as the pawn. I've been there, myself. That's when the chase begins. In reality, it can never end, as the perfection we have in our minds can never truly exist, not is is often defined enough to materialize in a comprehensive analysis of one's true wants.

As for a 10% decline with 1000% savings, well, yea. [Edit:] Check out the video below at the ~7:55 mark. The guy believes he's removing static. Why ruin the illusion, when he's so happy?

 

[jazdoc]

In the context of the arc of human history, a $49 iPod shuffle would be considered nothing short of miraculous and addiitonal expenditure would be regarded as foolhardy and wasteful...

Price is what you pay, value is what you receive and therefore is subjective. As with almost everything in life, high-end audio has a diminishing rate of return and there is oft times, but not always, a correlatation between price and performance As long as they are taking care of their obligations and not a burden on society, I could care less how others choose to spend their earnings. I consider myself fortunate to be friends with Mike Lavigne and feel not one whit of jealously for his magnificent room and system. Indeed, I'm happy for him because his system makes him brings him great joy. His expenditures do not invalidate my decisions nor lessen the enjoyment I receive from my much more humble set up.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Nice thread , off course it should be " the whats best forum " , $$$ is only money .
What you do with the money /your own choices , makes a great system .
i certainly judge a lot of high end by buildquality/value versus price , when the 2 come together is when the fun starts , point is they dont always come together.
For real magic : listening roomdimensions /structure is off great importance ( i dont belong in that catagorie ).
I once bought a Wadia 581 a " real high end player " , sold it with considerable loss after 2 months , to me it had no real value.
Same with Mid bass units / tweeters , in my next model i will use considerable lower priced midunits and tweeters compared to the accuton ceramic /diamond , not because they cost less

 

[microstrip]

Personally, I think that listening to audio equipment as a hobby is, well, stupid (I'm not discounting the efforts of those who review and inform the public). (...)

I will not dare to ask your opinion about those who post about their experiences listening to audio equipment ...

 

[opus111]

Just to be clear here, for a large group of audiophiles, measurements dont matter. Their ears are what matters, and their ears have them swapping out components over and over, upgrading, and hearing differences that are improvements. Its their style of doing things. There is another group of audiophiles, who measurments do matter. Your use of noise modulation, as viewed by measurement shows you are looking for better SQ by driving down a meaasurment or atleast reducing it with a filter, etc. I appreciate your efforts to reduce an issue with redbook cd as you see it. And its measurable, and that makes it even better to realize your ambition, because its measurable. Otherwise, its just another opionion in my book. Measurements are not meaningless to verify replication accuracy, but of course, they are meaningless when it comes to micros opinion of what sounds good, or mine, or yours. Thats preference, and is highly system dependent too.

I was going to say 'yay, in agreement.'. But then I got to your last sentence and have to stick out against such nonsense as claiming that what's better is just opinion or preference. Its neither, just as beauty isn't a matter of opinion, so fidelity in sound isn't either. Having measurements will provide meat on the bones for that - what measures better (when the measurements are the right ones) sounds better.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Just to be clear here, for a large group of audiophiles, measurements dont matter. Their ears are what matters, and their ears have them swapping out components over and over, upgrading, and hearing differences that are improvements. Its their style of doing things.

i would respectfully challenge you on the 'swapping out components over and over' part. is that a generalization that is a 'feeling', or do you have specific instances you can cite?

i simply do not see this activity with the most serious audiophiles that i know. but maybe educate me.

 

[taters]

I will not dare to ask your opinion about those who post about their experiences listening to audio equipment ...

You already know what his opinion is.

 

[Shaffer]

I will not dare to ask your opinion about those who post about their experiences listening to audio equipment ...

Because, asserting that auditioning gear as a hobby is stupid must mean that sharing all auditory experiences is stupid. Like seriously?

 

[mep]

Look, this thread is about whats more expensive, are you saying that in a room comparing your finished DAC unit at say $3K vs a (the topic of this thread) $25K DAC, and you dont think preference for price will dominate? What measures better is proven not to be always preference. I can skew simple FR and a bunch of people will pick that unit over a flat one because it fleshes out the bones....ie adds more strength in the midrange....but look, I do believe in measurements, as is well known on this forum, and I do also believe in full measurements, which the manufacters do not do simply because they dont have to....no money no object people demand full specs, they only purchase on cost...

If I'm interpreting what you are trying to say here, I think you mean that for people whom cost is no object, they don't demand full specifications of the gear they are purchasing-they are solely basing their purchasing decision on how expensive the gear is. If this is a correct interpretation of what you were trying to express, this thread has gone off the tracks.

 

[JackD201]

Reverse snobbery. Ah the irony.

 

[opus111]

Look, this thread is about whats more expensive, are you saying that in a room comparing your finished DAC unit at say $3K vs a (the topic of this thread) $25K DAC, and you dont think preference for price will dominate?

I agree that people have preferences where price is concerned - they set themselves a budget and the equipment chosen normally fits neatly within (or within some margin over) it. I was talking though about audio fidelity not being a preference. To me audio transparency is analogous to window glass transparency, its not a matter of opinion or preference. That's not to deny there are some who prefer tinted windows but they won't try to deny their windows are, in fact, tinted.

What measures better is proven not to be always preference. I can skew simple FR and a bunch of people will pick that unit over a flat one because it fleshes out the bones....ie adds more strength in the midrange....

So you're saying just a particular bunch wants colouration? Not that everyone prefers it?

but look, I do believe in measurements, as is well known on this forum, and I do also believe in full measurements, which the manufacters do not do simply because they dont have to....no money no object people demand full specs, they only purchase on cost...

There are some who do yeah, I don't consider people who buy on cost alone to be the mainstream market. The numbers of such consumers (I call them this rather than customers) are currently inflated because the industry's in a bubble right now.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Tomelex what FR deviations do you mean , Dacs are mostly better than something like +-0,1 db in the audioband same as amps , not worth mentioning .
what would then be the conclusion of this thread, if i follow your logic it would be rich people are deaf ???

Look, this thread is about whats more expensive, are you saying that in a room comparing your finished DAC unit at say $3K vs a (the topic of this thread) $25K DAC, and you dont think preference for price will dominate? What measures better is proven not to be always preference. I can skew simple FR and a bunch of people will pick that unit over a flat one because it fleshes out the bones....ie adds more strength in the midrange....but look, I do believe in measurements, as is well known on this forum, and I do also believe in full measurements, which the manufacters do not do simply because they dont have to....no money no object people demand full specs, they only purchase on cost...

 

[Old Listener]

You can find threads like this on many audio forums at any time. After one thread winds down, a similar one will start on the same forum within a week or two. There seem to be a number of audiophiles disturbed by the rapid escalation in prices.

One sentiment from such threads that I find striking: "I've been an audiophile for 30 years and it feels as if the hobby has been hijacked."

Bill

 

[rbbert]

I will not dare to ask your opinion about those who post about their experiences listening to audio equipment ...

I'm guessing he meant as opposed to listening to music (or any of many other rewarding past-times)...

 

[andromedaaudio]

I do agree to a certain extent with the cable thing but thats for anyone to decide .
On speakerlevel you re probably talking about something like +- 3 db for a average speaker ,( if they make it in room) .
Dacs deviations are worthless in my opinion compared to the speakerdeviations
Why does somebody buy a rolex ??? its the same time than a 10 $$ one

 

[microstrip]

This thread is not off the tracks....its whats is best vs what costs the most, and yes, I am saying that people who can afford, in general, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gear, shop for stereo like they do anything else, they buy a "service" to get them what they want, and just that very act exlcudes less price and equal or better preformance gear.

Tom,

IMHO the part I highlighted in bold is not the general rule. Although there are exceptions, most of the time spending more gets you better performance. And performance can mean a lot, not only sound quality at shows or showrooms. It includes thinks such as sound quality in user spaces and conditions, reliability, aspect , warranty, installation, support and even friendships.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Tom,

IMHO the part I highlighted in bold is not the general rule. Although there are exceptions, most of the time spending more gets you better performance. And performance can mean a lot, not only sound quality at shows or showrooms. It includes thinks such as sound quality in user spaces and conditions, reliability, aspect , warranty, installation, support and even friendships.

In reference to the bolded I agree, but not 100%. For someone like me who comes from an entry-level setup the move to better quality of sound has to involve spending more money, but were not talking 'what's best" money here. As some of you know, I have embarked on that process and the results so far have been well worth the expenditures, and I hope that more are coming in the not too distant future. However, I do believe there is a point whereby spending more significantly reduces the cost vs quality ratio, and that is the sweet point I personally would like to find. I also think that "sweet spot" is not all that far away, because I honestly and truly believe there is affordable and high quality gear out there at prices that don't offend.

"What's Best" is different for everyone, but we can all have "what's best" based on our own requirements and levels of satisfaction.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Seriously, how many components have you gone through in your system over the last 30 years? Very few, IME, stick with the stuff they purchased thirty years ago. And that is not a put down at all. If measurements don't matter, then how do you know when its time to upgrade? Or, what is an upgrade? If you want more power....well, thats a measurment. If you system just does not "sound" like the other guys system you heard, how do you know what to change to "get" that sound...other than the most obvious thing, the speakers. If you have a TT, how do you choose what cartridge to get....etc.

seriously?? 30 years......thirty.

with all due respect Tom.....why would i even respond to that?

No, component swap out is reduced if you believe in specifications, and understand the inaudibility of which way your orient a fuse and stuff like that. Audiophiles do a lot of serching.

This is how I do it. I have a plain old stereo system, plenty of power, low distortions up to the speakers, and I enjoy the "tone" o the speakers "most" of the time...but the California sound is well, a sound. I have a SET system, along with the required high efficieny, well, smooth response, speakers (modified). I have several headphones. I have serveral outboard processors.....I have a world of preferences, and choose according to the music or my mood. So, I actually, in a way, very regularily, swap components so to speak.

i respect you have your own process.

i was responding to your 'swapping gear' comment, where you threw out that label. can you come up with more evidence to support that besides a request for a list of 30 years of gear?