Actually, Tao's statement that I quoted was a para phrase of Mark Antony's speech in (julius) Caesar, so I just replied back with the same (lend me thy ears)
Valin's new MSB Reference dac & transport review, AS Product Year Award
- Thread starter Mike Lavigne
- Start date
Actually, Tao's statement that I quoted was a para phrase of Mark Antony's speech in (julius) Caesar, so I just replied back with the same (lend me thy ears)
Yes, Shakespeare became audiophile jargon since long, even before you started bickering Mark ...
Fortunately Tao did not quote integrally!
Sorry for the cut and paste job from the Wilson marketing thread (as I'm a bit busy), so the context is blockbuster brands vs. small brands.. but the idea is that success is determined not just by economic factors alone, but by human psychology (subjectivity, fear of loss, etc.), as well as social factors (social proof, desire to connect, etc.)...
"First let me say that I am not talking about any individual’s taste in gear. To me, whatever people do in their personal life, including what kinds of sex, art, sports, or audio they enjoy is irrelevant as long as no one is hurting anyone else. I am sure you and those who own those other blockbuster brands have very fine systems. And I have heard some blockbuster brands sound fabulous in some systems and sound atrocious in others. In the end, achieving happiness is a moral goal, and as long as having great music in your life makes you a better doctor, lawyer, businessman, engineer, or whatever people do, is all that matters.
Yet, on a micro level, doesn't it make you wonder why certain people choose certain brands, and why there is a clump of very popular blockbuster brands mentioned above exists? I don’t have any industry sales stats, but using common sense, it’s probably a safe bet to apply the 80/20 rule and assume that those popular brands get most of the sales.
With so many choices, in the so-called “golden age” of audio, why are there just a select few brands extolled by the media, carried by most dealers, and purchased by customers. First, there is no engineering/ hard sciences answer. There are few “objective” claims to high quality, and audio customers disagree on what is good, so their choices reflect tastes, not verifiable differences in quality. And sure, there is a superficial answer….
But those of us with a background in social psychology and behavioral economics like to scratch beneath the surface and try to understand human behavior... How many guys that bought the Magico or Wilson also seriously auditioned the Vivid Giya? How many Audio Research buyers seriously auditioned CAT? Many of those who have are blown away by how much better CAT is than ARC… And how many folks would be willing to admit they can live with either brand (because to them the differences are minor) but chose the more popular brand so they can start a “my system” thread on audiogon or here, and socially relate to more people. If you start talking about CAT or Vivid, people will not engage with you on the same level as with a more popular brand. Start talking about Wilson or Pass, and people have an opinion, and you are talking about it for years while getting thousands of hits in your thread, vs. taking about a less popular brand and ending your conversation in a week or 2, and having your thread die…
Human nature is very interesting. There is a big social aspect to this hobby. Talking about gear is similar to re-experiencing it. (How many times do people re-tell great vacation stories, even after many years?) Based on the initial chatter and buzz, audiophiles can go to dealers and hear a product. Many will buy it and start yapping about it to their friends and online…And it’s just human nature to yap about a popular product than a more obscure one, which may just absolutely kick the popular product’s ass in every way possible. But sadly, many folks on the forums only talk about the popular products because they get extra enjoyment of discussing shared experiences of products they own or are familiar with. So many ARC fans are ARC fans only because others are ARC fans. The technical term for this phenomenon is “social proof”, but such is human nature. Whether people realize it or on, Popularity happens to be a HUGE signal for quality in our hobby.
Also, interestingly, research shows that consumers of obscure products appreciate those products less than owners of popular products. The more obscure the product, the less likely it is to be appreciated. In effect, what results is a natural monopoly of popular, yet not necessarily “best” products. People’s tastes tend to converge on a select few blockbuster products rather than be dispersed across the assortment of available offerings.
And the internet/ social media, of course, amplifies all of this…
But social proof is just one influence force acting on us. There are others even stronger. With so many overwhelming choices and extremely high prices, it sure hurts a lot if you go with the wrong piece. In fact it hurts a lot more to lose a dollar than to gain a dollar. (It’s just human nature and it affects famous investors, famous athletes, audiophiles, and pretty much everyone else. For example, it has been proven that people sell winning stocks too early but hold on to losers for a long time in fear of experiencing a loss.) So why not buy a product that many others like and is favorably thought of by professional reviewers/ audio intellectuals? Surely, one cannot be too wrong and not experience that painful loss.
People can claim to be not be swayed by influences and making deeply personal choices. But then you look at the most popular brands like Wilson, Magico, Macintosh, etc., and you have to ask: Not Swayed? Right!!! …
By looking at the popular brands, it clearly shows most guys in this hobby are herd thinkers (both audiophiles, dealers, and reviewers). Bring it up and they deny it. They use their ears, they say. But they are operating from a set of biases they are not even aware of. But then why is this clump of Magico, Wilson, ARC, Macintosh, etc., getting most of the sales and reviews while virtually everyone else is starving (or keeping a second job)? How many of those low selling brands sell just a single unit a year, usually to their mother?
It’s no coincidence that people’s tastes converge on select few brands rather than be dispersed across the assortment of available offerings. With so many different flavors of sonic signatures in individual components, one can build so many systems to create a similar sound and excellent sound. Guys who run audio magazines are assured of an audience and ad sales by covering and hoarding around the popular brands. Dealers are assured of customers walking into their shops. Audiophiles hoard around these popular “Lady Gagas” and “Peyton Mannings” and the result is a strong concentration of sales for the blockbuster brands that promise familiar and repeatable experiences in an uncertain market.
Now with the economic and social psychology theory and ideas in place, the more demanding audiophiles check out not just the popular brands, but check every nook and cranny to find the less popular brands that frequently outperform the blockbusters."
Hi Microstrip,
Your resistance reminds me of a quote by a famous economist, Keynes:
"Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist."
Caesar, nice post. What you brought to our attention actually applies to all aspects of consumer consumption, not just in the audio realm. Same human behavior throughout. Well known to psychologists and those in the business of selling anything. Brand building and recognition is always a major factor in retail.
BTW, I like your CAT/ARC analogy, very true, IME.
BTW, I like your CAT/ARC analogy, very true, IME.
Hi Microstrip,
Your resistance reminds me of a quote by a famous economist, Keynes:
"Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist."
Caesar,
I expected better than wikiquotes, but nowadays it is part of life in every forum ...
Anyway , your ability of diverging from the main subject of posts you quote equals your characteristic of never answering directly questions ...
Last edited:
Why do you care? If folks want to buy from smaller brands and enjoy them, that's fine. Others want to buy well-distributed products with dealerships that help out in time of problem or upgrade. There isn't a "better" or "worse" just a different path.
You seem to think a Wilson or Magico owner is an idiot or at minimum naive for no reason and with no justification - and you also assume many of them haven't heard a Vivid when most likely have at any show in the US or Munich. Not to mention Vivids look really weird (I'm being nice) and that's why nobody buys them.
And you keep bringing up CAT as a perfect example- well, Ken Stevens can't even get a friggin' website up in 2019. So don't put the onus on audiophiles about not knowing product when the manufacturer is in the internet dark age and relies on the telephone.
Keith, you are being a little unfair to Ken Stevens IMO. Ken is certainly not the best marketing specialist in our hobby, but I don't think that is a reason to state what you did about him. Ken obviously doesn't see the need to expand his business via the web. He also seems perfectly happy to enact his business as he does. I personally wouldn't market the way he does, but that is his call..and his right.
Ron,
As a guy who only just got LOL this one was tough but...
GOAT = Greatest Of All Time
So Muhammad Ali was perhaps the GOAT of GOATs... and LL Cool J released an album G.O.A.T. but it certainly wasn’t an album to float anyone’s boat so could now just as easily go down as more of an unG.O.A.T. really.
I only quoted a small portion because of length...
Well .... maybe.
I will make a few close-to-boundary comments in the spirit of your rants (non-pejorative) throughout this entertaining thread.
On the assumption that people who acquired enough money to buy expensive audio brands (cars, houses, etc.) have some intelligence and general day-to-day smarts (in virtue of having done so) that those buyers are relatively self-aware and sufficiently sophisticated that they don't allow themselves to be guided by below-the-surface social herd influences. Some do buy for status, but that's different.
Maybe, just maybe, people continue to purchase "...the most popular brands like Wilson, Magico, Macintosh..." not because they are popular or pitched by magazines but because they actually like what they hear. Maybe such brands are popular not because of social herd factors but because they perform well. (Though there actually may be a McIntosh herd.) There may be economic influences at play moreso than social, such as: support, ease of access to repair, ease of resale.
Take Wilson for example. I suspect quite a few people find considerable appeal in having speakers shipped to their house then have one or more guys come and set them up. I don't know if you find psychological / social explanations in that.
I do remain confident that sociologists and psychologists will continue to tell use that sociological and psychological factors are in play.
Well .... maybe.
I will make a few close-to-boundary comments in the spirit of your rants (non-pejorative) throughout this entertaining thread.
On the assumption that people who acquired enough money to buy expensive audio brands (cars, houses, etc.) have some intelligence and general day-to-day smarts (in virtue of having done so) that those buyers are relatively self-aware and sufficiently sophisticated that they don't allow themselves to be guided by below-the-surface social herd influences. Some do buy for status, but that's different.
Maybe, just maybe, people continue to purchase "...the most popular brands like Wilson, Magico, Macintosh..." not because they are popular or pitched by magazines but because they actually like what they hear. Maybe such brands are popular not because of social herd factors but because they perform well. (Though there actually may be a McIntosh herd.) There may be economic influences at play moreso than social, such as: support, ease of access to repair, ease of resale.
Take Wilson for example. I suspect quite a few people find considerable appeal in having speakers shipped to their house then have one or more guys come and set them up. I don't know if you find psychological / social explanations in that.
I do remain confident that sociologists and psychologists will continue to tell use that sociological and psychological factors are in play.
Well, that's a clever but fairly slippery reply. You say that forum comments and what I'll call formal reviews (print reviews) are no different, but then you go on to talk about equality of people comments. Then you note that print reviews and forum comments (I'll leave out dealer remarks because that was not in my question.) can be as interesting or as entertaining or as informative, etc. as one another. That is to say you have a reaction to or opinion about what you read; though having a reaction or opinion for each is not grounds of equivalence.
While just about anybody who knows a little HTML and buys some Web hosting service can call himself a reviewer, there are some differences between formal reviews and forum comments. There are requirements and structure in formal reviews that do not obtain in forum comments. Perhaps such differences don't make a difference for you, but they still exist.
Formal component reviews go through a vetting process apart from the author before they get published. Forum comments do not. Formal reviews are fact-checked by manufacturers for technical accuracy prior to publication. Formal reviews are edited for grammar, spelling, concision, readability, comprehension, rambling, etc. before publication. Forum comments don't get edited or evaluated by a third party. Formal review authors have hands-on experience with the product covered in the review and follow certain protocols and processes while reviewing a product.
Formal reviews can be and often are less overt in their conclusions, especially if they are negative than forum comments; few reviews will say 'this product is not very good', at least not in such terms, though they may say so in other ways. Forum comments can say pretty much anything with or without explanation. Forum comments are usually written in a few minutes while formal reviews are written over days, weeks or longer. Formal reviews generally have a structure to them and must include certain pieces of information. Almost all formal reviews include product cost, manufacturer's contact information, system review context, sonic description and usually information about how the product is designed and constructed. Forum comments have no content requirements and can say whatever they want.
Formal review authors have hands-on experience with products under review typically for several months, sometimes longer - in their own systems, where operating contexts are well understood. I know you said to me that you can make jugement about a product in a very short time and don't need weeks to form an understanding; a formal review substantially reduces the liklihood of snap decisions - you may disagree but there is value in having the perspective of someone who has spent time with a component in a constant environment. Formal reviews are not based on what was heard at a show or a friend's house or some dealer's showroom for a day or two. Many, though not all, formal review authors have acquired years of review experience - it is pretty straightforward to identify those who do. Maybe some forum comments have some of these characteristics, maybe not.
This is not putting put down forum comments, their entertainment value nor their practical value (some quite valuable), nor forum participants (heaven forfend), but there are differences between forum comments and formal reviews. Imo, that's a good thing.
All well and good, Tim, but it becomes meaningless if the formal review is worthless -- like the review in the thread title.
Nice post, Caesar. I do think Magico for one deserve their good reputation. But when I was in the market for a reference monitor speaker, I decided that Magico was a too expensive (and for some other reasons less attractive) option for me, even though I had heard the Mini II many times (in Peter A.'s system) and liked it a lot. I also liked the Magico Q1 very much. I opted for the top Reference 3A monitor, the Reflector, based on my ownership experience with their MM DeCapo BE monitors.
I got a monitor that in my view easily can compete with the Magico monitors -- at half the price.
I don't care how popular a brand or model is. I am not into status symbols either. I care about bang for the buck. I drive a cheap (and surprisingly fun to drive) Nissan Versa SV sedan even though I could easily afford a more expensive car. In fact, I take a perverse pride in driving such a cheap car to work at my company, where I enjoy a respected status. And I smile about those who think they still need to prove themselves and drive up to work in a typical status-symbol car (a fun expensive sports car is a different matter, imo). Interestingly, our executives don't care about fancy cars either.
For you sure; we all get our opinion, which is fine. I did not read it Al as the subject holds no interest for me. My not having read it does not change my point. Whether you found 'meaning' in one review or not doesn't change the differences, one of whose purposes is to try maintaing some integrity to the formal review process. Notice I said 'try'. Forums operate in a different context.
Similar threads
