The Case for High End Audio

[Mike Lavigne]

Wow snarky. I’m curious and learning makes me happy. Is that ok with you? It does inform my decisions.

fair enough. agree i was a little over the top there. only that i have observed that most who push hard for explanations are not in any way seriously interested in acquisition. they have more interest in shooting holes and are offended by the price. yet actually making that case gets elitist. guilty as charged.

 

[tima]

One high end designer and manufacturer is known for personally listening to each speakers before they are shipped.

Warren Gehl, "Sonic Development Engineer and Aural Evaluator" at Audio Research personally listens to every component before it goes out the door. He helps voice new components during the design-test phase. That is a lot of components. He's been there a long time and from personal experience I know he has excellent ears.

 

[tima]

i have observed that most who push hard for explanations are not in any way seriously interested in acquisition. they have more interest in shooting holes and are offended by the price. yet actually making that case gets elitist. guilty as charged.

Maybe that's your group who has no technical interest, not 'most'. People read reviews of products they don't plan to buy. Some are interested in the latest state-of-the-art even if they cannot afford it. I would not dismiss genuine interest and curiosity -- those were there long before sniping keyboard warriors.

 

[TonyW]

Back several decades I used to love reading about audio gear that was out of my reach. It was the same for the car magazines. I don’t know if it were the writers but in the 1980s I remember I felt a connection with the authors and their style of writing or editing, and they made me feel like I was hearing the gear or driving the car myself. This was when Autoweek was printed newspaper style giving it an underground style of authenticity. They also used to focus more on racing, I remember.

Maybe it was like being a kid in the 1960s browsing the toy section of the thick Sears catalog. I would look forward to reading Stereophile’s annual Recommended components list and dream about a collection of gear I would love to own. Maybe the writing isn’t what it used to be, or maybe since I have the gear now that I dreamed about owning for years, I’m not so interested.

 

[TonyW]

Warren Gehl, "Sonic Development Engineer and Aural Evaluator" at Audio Research personally listens to every component before it goes out the door. He helps voice new components during the design-test phase. That is a lot of components. He's been there a long time and from personal experience I know he has excellent ears.

26 years ago now I was living and working in Stuttgart, Germany. My office was outside of town in a place called Schwieberdingen. I used to see almost daily a parade of new Porsche 911s clad with fender protectors driving the country roads past my window. The Porsche factory in Zuffenhausen used these country roads as their test track. Perhaps it was the lack of available real estate around Zuffenhausen, but the big automakers in the US all have test tracks for BSR (Buzz, Squeaks, Rattle) testing. Used to, I don’t know about today every car that came off of the assembly line was driven on this approx. 1.2 mile track with bumps, dips and curves to test for BSR. I spent an hour or two riding on one of these tracks once. Anything not properly fastened in place is certainly heard on this track. It is cheaper to find the problems at the factory, find root cause and implement corrective action versus paying dealers to repair the cars under warranty over the model year.

Similar to hifi, the ultimate testing comes back to the human factor. In just a few moments a person can determine if the product is right or if something is wrong. Something that machinery or measurement equipment cannot always detect- at least not easily. And hifi is about perfection.

We crave perfection. I still enjoy live concerts, the civilized ones these days, not the blaring 120dB rock concerts assaulting my senses. A live concert has its drawbacks. The sound may not be optimal and the performers might be off a beat or miss a cue. But it’s that one in a hundred concerts where the magic happens- the crowd, the performers are connected and everything clicks. We’ll go to another 100 concerts just to experience that magic again. But with hifi I can experience near perfection everyday. While the studio strives to get the optimum sound and the band does mulitple takes, we build our systems to get as close to perfection as we can possibly afford. The producer can splice together the perfect performance that we can listen to over and over. In fact, we find the most perfect recording(s) to use in perfecting our audio systems.

It’s the same with movies over plays. It is not just the convenience of watching a movie, the movie is a compilation of perfect takes. We enjoy seeing every line, every motion timed and executed to perfection. It goes beyond realism. Just like with our music. Hifi isn’t about reality. Hifi is about perfection. Listening to my system last night, I could hear the performers fingernails pulling on the guitar strings. It’s a thrill to hear such detail and ultra realism but realistically, if I were sitting 10 feet from the guitarist hearing him play in an acoustically perfect room, I could still never hear that level of detail. My head would have to be just a foot or two away from his guitar.

I’m not knocking it. I’m deep into the perfectionist paradigm. I know that sometimes I’m not listening to the music, I’m caught up in the detail- the sound of the skin on the drums or hearing the color of the lipstick the singer is wearing. (Yeah, sometimes it seems possible. At least I can hear the thickness of the lipstick.)

 

[tima]

Similar to hifi, the ultimate testing comes back to the human factor. In just a few moments a person can determine if the product is right or if something is wrong.

I think in Warren Gehl's case he is listening for any sample to sample variation that would indicate a technical flaw. He already knows the product intimately. For myself, while first impressions can be telling I've learned over time that they are not always a final judgement.

 

[tima]

I know that sometimes I’m not listening to the music, I’m caught up in the detail- the sound of the skin on the drums or hearing the color of the lipstick the singer is wearing. (Yeah, sometimes it seems possible. At least I can hear the thickness of the lipstick.)

Some time back I had a David Berning ZOTL amp in house. The most transparent amp I ever heard. I would jokingly say I could tell that Dusty in 'The Look of Love' brushed with Ipana not with Colgate.

 

[TonyW]

I bought the Cowboy Junkies Trinity Album on vinyl when it first came out in the 1980s. I love that album, the music and the ambience. The recording is not perfect, it has its flaws. It you read the back story you will understand why. When the remastered version was released a few years back, I stubbornly resisted buying it. I stood by “Art for the sake of art”. This is the album and it should be remembered and heard for how it is.

Then I heard the remastered album one day at Hifi Buys in Atlanta. I bought the remastered vinyl for myself and I listen to only that version now. Does that make me a shallow person?

 

[Dierkx1]

Hi Ted, hope all is well!

I think the concept of "high end" is very personal. My issue with today's high-end is there's often a very thin veneer of luxury used to denote a product as high end that is often questionable, as in there's little substance to back up the bling.

A couple of examples... Luxury cars simply don't have the build quality they used to, both mechanically and otherwise. Mercedes used to go through great lengths to make every component it uses truly high end both under the hood and in the interior. It made for a really big difference between how these cars were made and how they felt to drive vs a regular car. A mid 80's BMW 635CSi or early 90's Merc 500E was a TRUE high-end luxury car because they were so much better than a "regular" car in every way. Today's luxury cars are often built on the same chassis as basic cars and while they may have larger motors and different interior materials that hardly justifies any major cost increase, they are basically just gussied-up regular cars with a thin veneer of luxury, they aren't as reliable as they used to be, they aren't as different and obviously better than anything else. I just saw a Ferrari GTC4Lusso with a wavy front bumper that didn't color match the metal, just like Mazda and Ford, with a ridiculous amount of orange peel. It was horrible, the car's exterior fit and finish was basic and ordinary, almost what you'd expect from an economy car. To be fair, I also recently saw a McLaren with the nicest paint job I've ever seen... it was a $115k option though!

Designer clothing used to be made with the best materials and techniques available. You'd get artistic design along with the best fabrics and impeccable finishing. Now you get a logo tee for $200 that's worth $5, ugly sneakers made in China on a budget, and even much lower standards for formal wear. There are exceptions, but there's no denying overall quality is often no better than buying clothes at Target.

So it seems like a lot of folks don't care about quality and "high end" is simply a matter of design, branding and status. To me, without real substance they are "fake luxury", there's a thin veneer of luxury over an ordinary product... but to each their own. I feel like sometimes consumers are mislead, but this has always been the case, an educated consumer is the best consumer and less likely to be taken advantage of. For me, no way I'd spend the cash on a modern luxury car or ridiculous non-functional designer sneakers made popular by rappers, those are, to me, fake luxury. I feel the same about some audio products but that can get contentious, lol.

Luckily there are products for everyone. I think in audio you pay a lot for brands and industrial design that doesn't contribute to sound quality, but that's fine, it adds to the pride of ownership for many folks and looks good in the living room. Luxury goods are by definition a niche market and there are niches for all, so there's no need for the broad appeal of a commodity item, the mfg'er/seller only needs a small slice of the market to buy. Every luxury brand has a story to tell, and different people with different priorities will buy into that brand's story. In one of Ron's recent threads he mentions the "mad scientist" type, well there's actually a brand called "Mad Scientist Audio" if that sort of thing appeals to you, there you go. If you want the specs and "real engineering" hey, Iconoclast has a product for you! And on and on... so many are just a bunch of BS but that's just my perspective. The story is there to justify the luxury pricing, that's how it works. I stay clear off all that as much as possible, but it shows everyone has a different idea of what high end means.

Also, I have not read this thread yet so apologies if some of this has been mentioned, this is just my initial reaction.

Amazon.com

www.amazon.com

Once luxury was available only to the rarefied and aristocratic world of old money and royalty. It offered a history of tradition, superior quality, and a pampered buying experience. Today, however, luxury is simply a product packaged and sold by multibillion-dollar global corporations focused on growth, visibility, brand awareness, advertising, and, above all, profits. Award-winning journalist Dana Thomas digs deep into the dark side of the luxury industry to uncover all the secrets that Prada, Gucci, and Burberry don't want us to know. Deluxe is an uncompromising look behind the glossy façade that will enthrall anyone interested in fashion, finance, or culture.

 

[Al M.]

I bought the Cowboy Junkies Trinity Album on vinyl when it first came out in the 1980s. I love that album, the music and the ambience. The recording is not perfect, it has its flaws. It you read the back story you will understand why. When the remastered version was released a few years back, I stubbornly resisted buying it. I stood by “Art for the sake of art”. This is the album and it should be remembered and heard for how it is.

Then I heard the remastered album one day at Hifi Buys in Atlanta. I bought the remastered vinyl for myself and I listen to only that version now. Does that make me a shallow person?

No, it doesn't. Sometimes artists themselves are unhappy with the initial mastering. Pete Townshend from The Who remastered their album Quadrophenia many years after the 1973 release. I cannot comment on the remastering, not having heard it.

Steven Wilson, a prog rock artist himself and an audiophile, has remastered a number of classic prog rock albums. I just bought Thick As A Brick by Jethro Tull with his remastering.

 

[microstrip]

(....) We crave perfection. I still enjoy live concerts, the civilized ones these days, not the blaring 120dB rock concerts assaulting my senses. A live concert has its drawbacks. The sound may not be optimal and the performers might be off a beat or miss a cue. But it’s that one in a hundred concerts where the magic happens- the crowd, the performers are connected and everything clicks. We’ll go to another 100 concerts just to experience that magic again. But with hifi I can experience near perfection everyday. While the studio strives to get the optimum sound and the band does mulitple takes, we build our systems to get as close to perfection as we can possibly afford. The producer can splice together the perfect performance that we can listen to over and over. In fact, we find the most perfect recording(s) to use in perfecting our audio systems. (...)

A very interesting subject that deserves a separate thread. IMO we can't reach perfection with stereo - particularly as we can't define it precisely.

Stereo is a very limited sound reproduction system in the physical sense.
People do not even agree on the objectives of sound reproduction. How can we define "perfection"?

 

[Lee]

Perhaps relevant to audio, the reviews also seem to take the price into consideration. A gadget that is low cost often seems to get a pass because the investment was so low. As the price goes up, folks are fussier. Of course, if a product fails when used, those get scathing reviews and, as you say, the purchaser may have used it in unintended ways.

In audio, it sometimes appears that this principle works in reverse. If the "gadget" is very expensive there is an assumption that it sounds very good and, with a considerable investment made, the user reviews seem to skew positive. Is there a professional review in the audio universe that doesn't use this logic: "I listened to the xyz's more expensive model, and of course it sounded better. It should at twice the price." Well, maybe. And maybe for that user/reviewer.

But while I've seen a new logic that says diminishing returns do not exist in audio (and I know it was more nuanced than that, but that is how it is often heard), diminishing returns do exist for the consumer. Nearly everyone has a budget. And sometimes what one wants to spend is less the what one can spend. Especially as prices rise into the stratosphere and, with a long road behind us, getting that last 5 - 10% might not seem reasonable if the existing setup already provides connection to the music and enhances the discovery of new albums, styles and musicians.

You can have increasing returns in high end audio and still have a specific level where a consumers says “this is good enough for me.”

You can also have increasing returns and find a product which seems to offer a sound quality that is associated with more expensive gear.

None of these things are mutually exclusive.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Some time back I had a David Berning ZOTL amp in house. The most transparent amp I ever heard. I would jokingly say I could tell that Dusty in 'The Look of Love' brushed with Ipana not with Colgate.

i had the 211/845 ZOTL Berning amp in my system for a weekend some years ago and agree it was very transparent. i'd say my darts were similarly transparent. however relative to other tube amps i've heard it was likely the most transparent....."not there"......one i've heard. zero sense of tube sameness artifacts. not the last word in bass weight or authority at least in my system/room.....but no slouch either in drive.

 

[Lee]

fair enough. agree i was a little over the top there. only that i have observed that most who push hard for explanations are not in any way seriously interested in acquisition. they have more interest in shooting holes and are offended by the price. yet actually making that case gets elitist. guilty as charged.

I always push for more information so I can get a better understanding of the product under review. Like John Atkinson, I am very curious how new technology and parts impact sound quality. With that understanding, I and other reviewers can help get the word out and that leads to sales for the manufacturer whether or not the reviewer is an actual buyer.

Factory tours further help because we can see things in person and watch the process, ask questions, and hear the results.

 

[Lee]

A very interesting subject that deserves a separate thread. IMO we can't reach perfection with stereo - particularly as we can't define it precisely.

Stereo is a very limited sound reproduction system in the physical sense.
People do not even agree on the objectives of sound reproduction. How can we define "perfection"?

I may differ here slightly. I think we can get really amazing sound with two speakers nowadays.

 

[microstrip]

I may differ here slightly. I think we can get really amazing sound with two speakers nowadays.

Lee,

In what aspect does your comment contradict or enter conflict with my post?

I surely subscribe your post.

 

[Lee]

Lee,

In what aspect does your comment contradict or enter conflict with my post?

I surely subscribe your post.

I was differing on the words “very limited”.

 

[Geardaddy]

Considering this hobby is for the most part subjective where is your yardstick?

There is a key issue which is product support on discontinued systems. The premise seems to be purchase "quality" as opposed to disposable.

Not me personally: You spend over 60K on a speaker pair 5 years ago and can't get a replacement driver.

This is actually happening right now. The fit and finish and drivers were all top notch yet you can't get a replacement for a damaged woofer.

If the manufacturer won't support a product beyond 5 years why spend the money on a statement system? The manufacturer treats them as disposable with no support how is that a "safe" investment for long term enjoyment?

Rob

that’s not acceptable. Who is the speaker manufacturer? Are they still in business?

 

[microstrip]

I was differing on the words “very limited”.

Probably you did not notice I wrote "in the in the physical sense".

Please re-read the whole sentence.

 

[PYP]

I always push for more information so I can get a better understanding of the product under review. Like John Atkinson, I am very curious how new technology and parts impact sound quality. With that understanding, I and other reviewers can help get the word out and that leads to sales for the manufacturer whether or not the reviewer is an actual buyer.

Factory tours further help because we can see things in person and watch the process, ask questions, and hear the results.

reliability information would be welcome too. Consumer Reports won't be reviewing amplifiers costing more than, say $20,000, any time soon. There is, however, anecdotal information about how repairs are handled. I've seen such comments on WBF.

Would seem that the repair policies result from the distributor in consultation with the manufacturer. Is that how it works?