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

[puroagave]

Anyone ever seen Chasing Classic Cars?

see the episode with wayne flying around the country in his clients’ citation jet looking for 'pinnacle' cars. the client already had brace of the top 3-4 most desirable muscle cars money can buy and owned a ferrari 250 GT lusso which carini did an off-body restoration on. i think he bought a gullwing merc and an auburn boattail speedster in this episode. the buyer was unemotional and seemed to be checking off a list of trophy cars he thought he should own not what HE really wanted, im sorry but this guy was the definition of a tool.

 

[JackD201]

Jack,

You should not have told it. Now we will have a lot of posts saying that we should sell our expensive amplifiers and CD players, get others costing one tenth and a sculpture to put close to the center front wall ...

More seriously many people can not imagine how important is synergy and setup in order to extract the full potential of high end components. We can easily change equipment for a better product, but unless we have the time and ability to optimize the system after this changing we will not appreciate it fully.

Well, it really happened and I'm not ashamed. We're only human. I agree with you though on the part about dealing with the details of optimization. The greater the bandwidth and the resolution, the less obvious the euphonic colorations, the quieter and more linear the room, the easier it is to hear all sorts of anomalies. I always say this. You get both the good and the bad.

I have seen people that buy based on sticker price, prestige, etc. I have seen people who have excellent sonics but have music collections you can fit in a shoebox. I haven't seen anyone like that here on this forum. The guys I see with big/expensive systems I've found to be knowledgeable AND experienced in both gear and music. The prestige buyers burn out and pursue other hobbies they think they can buy into. You don't find them on forums.

 

[edorr]

I have seen people that buy based on sticker price, prestige, etc. I have seen people who have excellent sonics but have music collections you can fit in a shoebox. I haven't seen anyone like that here on this forum. The guys I see with big/expensive systems I've found to be knowledgeable AND experienced in both gear and music. The prestige buyers burn out and pursue other hobbies they think they can buy into. You don't find them on forums.

Very true. A bona fide high-end audio snob will not waste his time hanging around this forum, because he has a fundamental lack of true interest in gear and probably even music. Our resident big spender Mike can hardly be accused of buying on the basis of price, because from what I gather at some point he ditched his Kharma's for the much cheaper Evolution Acoustics MM3 simply because he liked them better sonically, while his uber expensive Transparent Opus cables have also been replaced with a far cheaper cable based on performance, not to mention the fact he could easily quadrupled his DAC outlay by going down the dCS path. So sure, the prestige buyers exists, but you won't find them here.

 

[Shaffer]

Felix, I'm a car guy as well as a hi-fi guy, and at least as far as cars are concerned, I'm not sure I fit into the three categories you described. I'm pretty knowledgeable, though I'm not turning wrenches, I've owned and driven all kinds of cars, from pre-war roadsters to the latest supercars and could be happy with a Morgan 3 wheeler. It's not pedestrian, it's not conquest, and it's not rust budget. I think, to a large extent, the same is true of my taste in hi-fi.

The Morgan 3-wheeler puts you into the 3rd category by default. Hell, just knowing that such a thing is available for purchase puts you into category-3. lol

Perhaps I wasn't clear. The rust budget was just an example of the "right car" vs the most expensive car. The "right car," ultimately, can indeed be very expensive or not. It's not the price that makes it "right;" the idea is based on what it is an an automobile.

see the episode with wayne flying around the country in his clients’ citation jet looking for 'pinnacle' cars. the client already had brace of the top 3-4 most desirable muscle cars money can buy and owned a ferrari 250 GT lusso which carini did an off-body restoration on. i think he bought a gullwing merc and an auburn boattail speedster in this episode. the buyer was unemotional and seemed to be checking off a list of trophy cars he thought he should own not what HE really wanted, im sorry but this guy was the definition of a tool.

Yes, that's the conquest buyer. To my mind, he's no different than the guys on the other what's best forum gauging their purchases solely by their value in monetary terms, while having no idea why they're spending the funds. I mean, audio-wise. On a personal level, I wish them the best, but I have nothing to talk to them about.

 

[dallasjustice]

I feel a great reality show coming. "Housewives of Athens' Audio" maybe?

 

[mep]

I feel a great reality show coming. "Housewives of Athens' Audio" maybe?

As long as they are smoking hot, it might work.

 

[Old Listener]

Bill,

I appreciate the time you take to answer my post, but unhappily the way you quote me, ignoring forum rules, makes a masquerade from my post and your answer. I will be very pleased to answer to your views if you could edit your post to make it clearly readable by others, allowing me to go on debating it.

BTW, one thing you do not seem to realize is that most companies do not carry audio research, but apply audio science developed by others. It is why we have IEEE, AES and many journals on acoustics where companies, research institutes and universities on acoustics that publish and disseminate their findings. As some people like to say, the best engineer is the one who does not need to invent anything!

Do you have an example of a academic research article that is directly contributed to the development of a very expensive audio product?

I looked at the forum terms of service and FAQ and have no idea why you think I am ignoring forum rules. In this thread, some people reply to a post without quoting it. Some people quote the entire post they are replying to. Others include only a part they are replying to. I try to make the context of my reply clear with a top quote with the name of the person I am replying to and enough of that post to establish context. Then I include part of the post directly above my remarks on that subject. There was no intent to mis-quote you.

Your earlier post:

Biil,

If they have been audiophiles for 30 years it means that they entered the hobby with the appearance of the CD. Should we conclude that since CD has only 16 bits they can not accept any product costing more than $65535?

More seriously, why do you think they feel disturbed? The high-end high prices were created by the economics, better knowledge of the audio science and easiness of access to technological developments. Designers could use resources to improve the performance of their products without being limited by the usual engineering limitation of having the normal ceiling price. They created state of the art very expensive equipment and now internet marketing techniques excessively expose these products, hiding that behind them the traditional market of value for money has better offers than ever. Is the creation of a forum called WhatsBestForum a signal that the hobby has been hijacked?

My reply:

a different view

> More seriously, why do you think they feel disturbed?

I commented on the tone of the posts I've seen in such threads. How people feel is not determined by your logic about the validity of high prices (or mine). I believe that the "hijacked" idea may be behind some of the rather passionate posts I see.

> The high-end high prices were created by the economics, better knowledge of the audio science ...

I don't see much “audio science” R&D from high-end companies with the exception of Harmon and perhaps one or two others. Not many audiophiles seem interested in the science behind the products either. Here are some assertions about high-end audio that I find plausible:

- Distribution is inefficient (expensive) compared to consumer electronics or pro-audio markets.
- Equipment is produced in too low numbers by companies that are too small to afford much investment.
- No innovation in terms of functionality or price/performance. So the market is stagnant or declining.
- The middle of the audio market shriveled during the recession. High-end audio companies moved further up market rather than down market.
- Dealers have been telling manufacturers that higher prices make equipment seem more valuable and salable.
- Some audiophiles have big money to spend on audio gear and they want to spend it. Over and over. They are the core customer base now.

Proof by assertion (yours or mine) is not proof at all.

> They created state of the art very expensive equipment and now internet marketing techniques excessively expose these products,

Gotta keep the conspicuous consumption discreetly hidden from the unwashed masses. Hard to pass up such an opportunity for humor.

> hiding that behind them the traditional market of value for money has better offers than ever.

Few of those better values are from the high-end companies that are discussed here. I'll be buying from the companies that offer real advances in function and price/performance.

> Is the creation of a forum called WhatsBestForum a signal that the hobby has been hijacked?

I think the hobby was hijacked some time ago. This forum reflects the way the high-end audio industry has gone and the way its customer base has narrowed.

I am disappointed in this forum. Steve stated his intention to bring in experts to lead discussions about real knowledge. There is very little of that left. What interests me is talking about real knowledge about audio, reasoning from that knowledge, reading about experiments and measurements from them. In a recent post tomelex said

“So, we have no lists, no specifics, we just enjoy audio. What the hell are we going to talk about? What is there to learn.”

I agree.

Bill

 

[microstrip]

Do you have an example of a academic research article that is directly contributed to the development of a very expensive audio product?

I looked at the forum terms of service and FAQ and have no idea why you think I am ignoring forum rules. In this thread, some people reply to a post without quoting it. Some people quote the entire post they are replying to. Others include only a part they are replying to. I try to make the context of my reply clear with a top quote with the name of the person I am replying to and enough of that post to establish context. Then I include part of the post directly above my remarks on that subject. There was no intent to mis-quote you.

Not all great products are created by direct contribution of something. Most of them are created by indirect incorporation of small aspects, your question can not have a direct answer. I can however refer to Dave Wilson. He several times referred specifically to this aspect. In his series "Conversations with Dave" he starts with an old reference book by G. A. Briggs. I can bet that their engineers read F. Toole articles, as well as many other great designers - I am thinking about Vivid Audio . Ralph Karsteen that is a member of WBF and manufacturer of Atmasphere reported in an interview that the basis of a recent upgrade to his gain circuit was due to his readings of a technical article. Do you think that DCS engineers do not read IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine? And Nelson Pass does not read technical papers? Every time I go through an audio patent I find plenty of references to audio science and engineering articles - I hope you do not think they are all there just to fill the pages. I will keep an open eye, next time I find an interesting reference I will post it.

Considering the quoting I was addressing the non standard use of the symbol > as a start of quote indication and no end of quote indication. It is not clear, and if someone later quotes it if becomes impossible to understand - people will even thing that my poor sentences are yours. As far as I know all quotations should be made using the adequate tools.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Not all great products are created by direct contribution of something. Most of them are created by indirect incorporation of small aspects, your question can not have a direct answer. I can however refer to Dave Wilson. He several times referred specifically to this aspect. In his series "Conversations with Dave" he starts with an old reference book by G. A. Briggs. I can bet that their engineers read F. Toole articles, as well as many other great designers - I am thinking about Vivid Audio . Ralph Karsteen that is a member of WBF and manufacturer of Atmasphere reported in an interview that the basis of a recent upgrade to his gain circuit was due to his readings of a technical article. Do you think that DCS engineers do not read IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine? And Nelson Pass does not read technical papers? Every time I go through an audio patent I find plenty of references to audio science and engineering articles - I hope you do not think they are all there just to fill the pages. I will keep an open eye, next time I find an interesting reference I will post it.

Considering the quoting I was addressing the non standard use of the symbol > as a start of quote indication and no end of quote indication. It is not clear, and if someone later quotes it if becomes impossible to understand - people will even thing that my poor sentences are yours. As far as I know all quotations should be made using the adequate tools.

And what about Keith Johnson?

 

[Gregadd]

Veblen Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good) rules the roost.

Atmasphere

It's not unique to audiophiles.

 

[Bruce B]

Very true. A bona fide high-end audio snob will not waste his time hanging around this forum, because he has a fundamental lack of true interest in gear and probably even music. Our resident big spender Mike can hardly be accused of buying on the basis of price, because from what I gather at some point he ditched his Kharma's for the much cheaper Evolution Acoustics MM3 simply because he liked them better sonically, while his uber expensive Transparent Opus cables have also been replaced with a far cheaper cable based on performance, not to mention the fact he could easily quadrupled his DAC outlay by going down the dCS path. So sure, the prestige buyers exists, but you won't find them here.

He bought the most expensive equipment and cables that Jonathan sells..!!

 

[Bill Hart]

Very true. A bona fide high-end audio snob will not waste his time hanging around this forum, because he has a fundamental lack of true interest in gear and probably even music. Our resident big spender Mike can hardly be accused of buying on the basis of price, because from what I gather at some point he ditched his Kharma's for the much cheaper Evolution Acoustics MM3 simply because he liked them better sonically, while his uber expensive Transparent Opus cables have also been replaced with a far cheaper cable based on performance, not to mention the fact he could easily quadrupled his DAC outlay by going down the dCS path. So sure, the prestige buyers exists, but you won't find them here.

Edorr- I'm going to take exception to one aspect of your statement- that the guy who just goes out and buys the most expensive system also probably has a lack of interest in the music itself.
I suspect there are buyers of expensive gear that have no interest in the equipment, but just want 'the best' (whatever that is), and love music. They just don't want to be bothered with the learning curve on gear, and have no real interest in devoting their time or energy to it, as we do.

 

[edorr]

Edorr- I'm going to take exception to one aspect of your statement- that the guy who just goes out and buys the most expensive system also probably has a lack of interest in the music itself.
I suspect there are buyers of expensive gear that have no interest in the equipment, but just want 'the best' (whatever that is), and love music. They just don't want to be bothered with the learning curve on gear, and have no real interest in devoting their time or energy to it, as we do.

As in an hobby, in audio you will always have some guys that go out and just buy expensive stuff because they can afford to without any real interest in gear / music. As you pointed out, I guess you also have guys that have unlimited financial resources, very limited time and no interest in technology, yet a genuine interest in music. These buyers would indeed not qualify as high-end audio snobs.

 

[NorthStar]

Edorr- I'm going to take exception to one aspect of your statement- that the guy who just goes out and buys the most expensive system also probably has a lack of interest in the music itself.
I suspect there are buyers of expensive gear that have no interest in the equipment, but just want 'the best' (whatever that is), and love music. They just don't want to be bothered with the learning curve on gear, and have no real interest in devoting their time or energy to it, as we do.

---- Very true Bill; I talked to a few of my audio dealers in the past, and they all said to me:
"Bob, we have high healed customers who come here and they ask us, what is your best amp and preamp, best pair of loudspeakers (the most expensive ones of course); and that's it! They just sign the cheque, and our staff put the goods in the truck, ready to be delivered."

And that, happens with the vast majority of well 'financed' people. For them what counts is to have the best, most expensive equipment. As for music listening; I dunno, never really been inside their own homes.
But I've been in the homes of pro musicians, well calibrated artists, and most of them have a BOSE radio/CD player!

Of all my friends, less than 0.1% have a serious stereo system. ...And I know a lot of people, mostly friends of course.

______________

The type of people I just referred to from above, you don't see them around here in audio forums of the Internet, like here at WBF.

Who are the average people who are members of audio forums of the Internet?
After ten years of surfing around, in my most preferred hobby of them all (Music, among others of course), and after over forty years at 'developing and nurturing and learning and spending time, money, dedication' into this deep passion of mine; I got a pretty good idea.

 

[MarinJim]

And what about Keith Johnson?

Morris Kessler? John Curl?

When I get back into the expensive stuff, my eyes are on the Italian company Angstrom Research. Talk about electronic porn.

 

[microstrip]

---- Very true Bill; I talked to a few of my audio dealers in the past, and they all said to me:
"Bob, we have high healed customers who come here and they ask us, what is your best amp and preamp, best pair of loudspeakers (the most expensive ones of course); and that's it! They just sign the cheque, and our staff put the goods in the truck, ready to be delivered."

And that, happens with the vast majority of well 'financed' people. For them what counts is to have the best, most expensive equipment. As for music listening; I dunno, never really been inside their own homes.(...)

Bob,

Looking at your post it seems that you have been talking mostly with unlucky and I think unhappy dealers. I was having dinner today with our larger high-end dealer/distributor in the country and we have debated the topic. Although he had one or two orders like that, they were exceptional. Most of the sales of expensive systems were to people who wanted the best, but were exigent customers looking for excellent sound quality. They did not put the goods in the truck - they installed them in the client houses and had to go through several tuning sections until the client was pleased. As they have a long tradition of good service and quality brands and clients trust them sometimes people do not ask for demos - they just tell them a few guidelines and accept their choice.

 

[JackD201]

I've yet to come across a client with an unlimited budget only clients that want the best they can afford. That price ceiling necessitates comparisons within a component category as well as allocation strategies. The second is an interesting thing to ponder. Where can you cut corners with the least performance loss? In other words, where are the differences least obvious? How about usage habits and ergonomics?

At any rate, in this type of real world situation where performance impressions per component are generated within specific system contexts, price as a decision data point becomes less in focus. This works both ways. I haven't taken score but I can say with some certainty that the most expensive in the category does not always win.

Loudspeakers are a funny thing. They remind me a lot of golf clubs. Most amateur golfers use shafts that are too stiff for them. Too many audiophiles have more speaker than their rooms can handle. "Stiffer is Better" is analogous to "Bigger is Better" in this case. Then there's the other extreme that takes it too far in the opposite direction using loudspeakers for nearfield for mid or even farfield listening who "think" using subs automatically bridges the gap when it doesn't particularly at the mid-hi XO points as well as mid-bass articulation because that one woofer per side is simply being asked to do work it was never designed for given the SPL drop off of ~6dB for every doubling of distance. Finding "Goldilocks" is therefore not anchored on what's bigger or most expensive within a product line just what works best.

 

[jazdoc]

A timely re-posting of a 1994 Stereophile article "RIP High End Audio?"

http://www.stereophile.com/content/rip-high-end-audio.

Twenty years hence, some audio geeks will be rehashing this discussion and someone will dig up this thread from the internet memory hole

 

[FrantzM]

A timely re-posting of a 1994 Stereophile article "RIP High End Audio?"

http://www.stereophile.com/content/rip-high-end-audio.

Twenty years hence, some audio geeks will be rehashing this discussion and someone will dig up this thread from the internet memory hole

I haven't read the article yet. It must be said however that we are not being replaced .. Our generation is on its way out and I don't see a long line of young people vying to replace us. The industry may change its ways and start catering to the <40 years old. So far I haven't seen much sign of that.
Also , I am not too sure that our spending power will increase with age, thus that we will be able to continuously afford increasingly expensive gears. Just a reminder: Twenty years from now most of us will be in their seventies

 

[puroagave]

A timely re-posting of a 1994 Stereophile article "RIP High End Audio?"

http://www.stereophile.com/content/rip-high-end-audio.

Twenty years hence, some audio geeks will be rehashing this discussion and someone will dig up this thread from the internet memory hole

a coincidence or maybe JA reads WBF.