An elitest's viewpoint.

[Jack in Wilmington]

I'm one that doesn't think that $4200 is expensive for an amp. Sorry Roy, but in the world were there are $100,000 amps, I'm with JM on this one. I think you're just reading too much into what MF said. I'll bet there are some members on this board that have spent more than $4200 on their amps or would have if they had bought them new. If I had the money, $4200 would not be out of the question for the right amp. $100,000 would.

[RoyY51]

Ah, come on, Chubbs. He said what he said. He either meant it or he shouldn't have said it. Personally I think he meant it, in which case it shows a contempt for people like most of us here.

Thank you, Feanor...I was beginning to think that I was the only one on this forum who understood the implications of Fremer's comment.

If I didn't have to "spread the points around" I would be sending a greenie your way!

[Florian]

Hello guys,

4200$ is a lot of money, and therefore a lot for an amplifier. Its a lot of money for almost anything.

One aspect which is very often forgotten are the service costs of hifi gear. Buying a old amplifier which used to cost 50K for lets say 16k seems like a good deal to some. But one day you need to have it restored (caps, some resistors, bias settings, load balancing etc...) which is very expensive. I am a prime example, i had my four Krell KRS200 monos serviced just 5 weeks ago for 6115$

So in my opinion its a relative, if you want to and can afford it then do it. 4500$ is not much for an amp if you really want it.

[Feanor]

The problem with this discussion is that none of us really know what Fremer was trying to say... Perhaps his words came out wrong or maybe he meant it to be an insult... Based on Fremer's very vocal stance on all things HiFi it could be either... Best bet might be to ask on the Stereophile forums and see if Fremer responds...

But frankly, I don't think it really matters... Fremer is just one reviewer at the mag...

Hooey: writers at 'Phile and TAS say all the time what a bargain, and how "affordable" this or that $5k component is. They believe this. Fremer just stated it a little more candidly than usual: If you can't afford spend $4000 on a component, then FO.

Florian: if my wife, daughter, and I gave up eatting for six months, why yes, I could bUy myself a $4200 amp; (otherwise not).

[Feanor]

Conclusions
Those who complain of the ever-increasing prices of high-performance audio gear need only look at the Music Reference RM-200 Mk.II. It provides high performance, high build quality, high reliability and I'm sure, great measurements-all at a low price, considering how much honest musical enjoyment it makes possible. And it's made in America.

It costs $4200. If that's your idea of "expensive," well regardless of what you can afford, You're in the wrong hobby. It has no blue LEDs, but you can't have everything.

Reading the conclusion I did not have the same reaction. I am curious what others think when they read the conclusion.

What?!? My Class D Audio SDS-258 sounds great, is well made in American, cost <$600 -- and damn! it has blue LEDs and amber ones too. (BTW, adding the LEDs in my build cost me about $2.)

[Florian]

Hi Bill, in this case it is not wise for you to buy an amplifier in that price category. My girlfriend and i have no kids and besides the house and cars no fix payments. Like i said it depends on the situation and if you want it or not. I dont think that this audio hobby (in that price category) should be for everyone, its like any other interest. It depends on your situation and interest.

Cheers

[Feanor]

Hi Bill, in this case it is not wise for you to buy an amplifier in that price category. My girlfriend and i have no kids and besides the house and cars no fix payments. Like i said it depends on the situation and if you want it or not. I dont think that this audio hobby (in that price category) should be for everyone, its like any other interest. It depends on your situation and interest.

Cheers

Thanks, Flo. You are both perceptive and sympathetic.

If only Fremer had added the "in that price category" qualification, we wouldn't be discussing it.

[Hyfi]

I'm one that doesn't think that $4200 is expensive for an amp. Sorry Roy, but in the world were there are $100,000 amps, I'm with JM on this one. I think you're just reading too much into what MF said. I'll bet there are some members on this board that have spent more than $4200 on their amps or would have if they had bought them new. If I had the money, $4200 would not be out of the question for the right amp. $100,000 would.

I am also with you, Jack. Although my current setup includes components that cost close to $4500 each, pre, amp, speakers, and another $2k in cables, I did not pay that much for them. I can say that the performance is very good compared to most $1k items.

I guess if I chose to use some of my retirement money, I could actually buy higher price gear. I choose not to.

My $1200 Stratos sounds real good and does compete with a lot of higher priced SS amps, but the Counterpoint is way more refined, detailed and more. The CP fell into my hands long after I bought the Stratos.

I did choose to spend $2500 13 years ago for a pair of Dynaudio speakers. That was a lot of money for my budget but I always wanted a pair, knew the performance and sound well, and knew I would get many years of pleasure out of them.

If I had to do it all over again or downsize, I would probably focus in on an integrated in the $5K range for all the same reasons I like the Counterpoint and VAC more than the Stratos and my olde long gone Sound Valves pre.

Like Jack said, in a realm of 100k amps, 180k speakers, 20k DACs or CDPlayers, let alone the cabling suggested for these types of components, $4200 for 20 years of glorious music in ones home is not over the top.

Has everyone saying it is actually sat down and listenedd to some real High End systems for any length of time?

Like I said in my first response, maybe the gear is not 50x better, but if you're a millionaire you would do it just to say you did.

[StevenSurprenant]

Oh Yea and I appreciate it. I really enjoy Stephen column. It has a little bit of human interest mixed with his review.

Jack, I think I was at your shop back in the 90's. Did you have a pair of Avalon (I think) for about $70,000 running on spectral gear? Did you also carry Joesph Audio speakers? Wilmington Delaware?

I am quoting MF again "When the RM-200 was in the system, I wanted for nothing-and for $4,200, that's something.

$4,200 is doable if it really is as good as he says. I've spent about that much before, and while the amp was good, there was no magic in my system, no synergy I suppose.

Everyone has their panties in a knot but I didn't feel he was taking a personal jab at anyone. It was simply an expression to get a point across.

No doubt! I didn't take offense at him. My posts were aimed more at the high cost high end where, for the average person, the prices are way out of context with what you get for your money. If I had a great deal of disposable cash, the bling inherent in high priced gear would be acceptable. You know, we could be discussing cars, or even homes. I've seen people spend $40,000 on a car that is only slightly better (in some ways) than a $20,000 car and think the extra $20,000 is justified, but would think spending $10,000 on an audio system is purely a waste of money.

I have to tell you that I loved Stereophile magazine and I think it's a great mag. Every month it came, I dropped everything I was doing and read it from cover to cover, including all the ads. In fact, that is how I found all the stores that I visited. It was a dream catalog and who doesn't like to dream?

I will add this... Stereophile is a glamour magazine and and as such cannot be taken seriously by mortal men. There is no point for the average person to read it as a guide toward their quest of audio nirvana. As for thinking they are uppity about their craft, it matters not, because it's an illusion that they peddle, nothing less and nothing more.
_________________________

As for Fremers comment, "If that's your idea of "expensive" , well, regardless of what you can afford, you're in the wrong hobby."...

I'm not sure what he was implying, but I think what he is saying is that it is too good to pass up. He just used a poor choice of words. I'm an optimist...

[Poultrygeist]

I believe most people on this forum would classify Meridian speakers as high end. My son-in-law owns a pair with built in amp and a Meridian cd player that cost around $30k new. I'd bet money that any member here who heard the Meridians compared to my home brew OBs and Bottlehead kit amp would say my set up sounds way better. Folks it's really not even close. So if my $1,000 DIY system stomps a $30,000 system then the 30k system is not really high end afterall or just maybe my cheapo gear is high end as well. But my point is that cost alone is not the deciding factor that defines high end.

[Hyfi]

But my point is that cost alone is not the deciding factor that defines high end.

Unfortunately for this hobby, and for a lot of people with money, it is.

That said, everyone in this thread knows that you can get very good performance for a lot less.

I don't care how much R&D goes into a $180K pair of speakers, they will not sound 179x better than a $1k pair. Better, most likely but in no way worth the cost, unless you have it to blow and just want them.

I guess the big problem is that mags like Stereophile have skewed the playing field because although they have favorably reviewed some lesser costing gear as of late, they still cater to outrageously priced items that do not exponentially perform better than lesser costing gear.

[Jack in Wilmington]

Sometimes I read the articles, even if the component that the article is about is something that I'm not interested in purchasing, just to see what associated music the reviewer used. I also like to read a review that may not get a glowing recommendation, just to read the manufacturers comments in the back. Especially if it's Roy Hall.

[StevenSurprenant]

I believe most people on this forum would classify Meridian speakers as high end. My son-in-law owns a pair with built in amp and a Meridian cd player that cost around $30k new. I'd bet money that any member here who heard the Meridians compared to my home brew OBs and Bottlehead kit amp would say my set up sounds way better. Folks it's really not even close. So if my $1,000 DIY system stomps a $30,000 system then the 30k system is not really high end afterall or just maybe my cheapo gear is high end as well. But my point is that cost alone is not the deciding factor that defines high end.

High end is a subjective term and there is no clear distinction that classifies the different levels of audio. I have a metric that serves me well, and that is, if I hear a system and I immediately focus on the performance being presented, while at the same time, I am consciously unaware of the gear producing it, that to me is high end. Cost or brand is not an issue.

[Hyfi]

Sometimes I read the articles, even if the component that the article is about is something that I'm not interested in purchasing, just to see what associated music the reviewer used. I also like to read a review that may not get a glowing recommendation, just to read the manufacturers comments in the back. Especially if it's Roy Hall.

The whole 10 years I read Stereophile I may have seen 1 or 2 disks used that I actually own. For the majority, they never seemed to use any genre that I listen to.

[Feanor]

I believe most people on this forum would classify Meridian speakers as high end. My son-in-law owns a pair with built in amp and a Meridian cd player that cost around $30k new. I'd bet money that any member here who heard the Meridians compared to my home brew OBs and Bottlehead kit amp would say my set up sounds way better. Folks it's really not even close. So if my $1,000 DIY system stomps a $30,000 system then the 30k system is not really high end afterall or just maybe my cheapo gear is high end as well. But my point is that cost alone is not the deciding factor that defines high end.

Yep, there are a couple of things here.

First, can you be into the audiophile hobbly on the cheap, (i.e. <$4k per component)? Hell, yes.

Second, do less expensive systems, (i.e. components <$4k), beat much more expensive systems? Hell, yes. As for you specific example, your OB/Bottlehead vs. Meridians, I don't know since I've heard neither.

Stereophile, Absolute Sound, and a few other aspirants have become Robb Reports targeting the audiophile subniche of luxury goods. With that insight we can better understand the carelessly contemptuous attitude their writes have towards the majority of sound enthusiasts.

[Jack in Wilmington]

The whole 10 years I read Stereophile I may have seen 1 or 2 disks used that I actually own. For the majority, they never seemed to use any genre that I listen to.

I've bought a few also, some with not so steller results. Some are out of print, and some I just can't find. Like the Nov. issue, in the review section in the back, they review a jazz cd titled Constellation. I can't find it anywhere. I recently bought a box set of Beethoven Piano Concertos that was recommended and they were outstanding.

[Ajani]

Stereophile, Absolute Sound, and a few other aspirants have become Robb Reports targeting the audiophile subniche of luxury goods. With that insight we can better understand the carelessly contemptuous attitude their writes have towards the majority of sound enthusiasts.

I certainly agree that many mags are catering to the lifestyles of the rich and famous crowd... But are you sure you're not taking it all a little too personally? I'm still not sure that Fremer's comments were meant to be a big middle finger to those of us unwilling or unable to drop $4K on a component...

Being obsessed with luxury gear doesn't make you a snob, being a condescending dbag about it does... So I'm not sure all these writers have crossed that line (though clearly some have)...

[Feanor]

I certainly agree that many mags are catering to the lifestyles of the rich and famous crowd... But are you sure you're not taking it all a little too personally? I'm still not sure that Fremer's comments were meant to be a big middle finger to those of us unwilling or unable to drop $4K on a component...

Being obsessed with luxury gear doesn't make you a snob, being a condescending dbag about it does... So I'm not sure all these writers have crossed that line (though clearly some have)...

Could be that Fremer doesn't think of himself as a condescending douche ... in the same way that Herman Cain maybe doesn't think of himself as having sexually harrassed women, or Henry Paulson doesn't think of himself as having bnggered the middle class to save the big banks.

[RGA]

This is what I read "When the RM-200 was in the system, I wanted for nothing-and for $4,200, that's something."

To me he is saying this amp hangs in with very expensive amps and doesn't leaving him desiring for more expensive amps - or you could read - "as good as mega-buck amps he likes."

My experience is the best of the best costs large sums of money that cheap stuff doesn't approach.

Yesterday I went to a very nice shop selling several systems - One system (All Roksan from cartridge wires turntable to amp, CD player and speakers was about $8,000) and it sounded really good - I listened to Eva Cassidy jazz master CD and some Beethoven piano works. For the money it sounded very good. It sounded good period and if you didn't audition the rig in the next room where the cables were more expensive than the entire Roksan system you'd be hard pressed to really find fault with it.

The problem is that the next room while ludicrously expensive with ~$250,000 system is wholly and entirely on another level.

There is simply no way anyone with decent hearing (and even if you're 90% deaf) could walk out of the two rooms and draw any other conclusion. The notion of "multiple times" better is not the issue. It doesn't have to be multiple times better - it either does it for you or it doesn't. And while it would be great to bury my head in the sand and read a spec sheet on the Roksan gear and conclude well it's better because it measures as good if not better but it's still just pretending - justification upon justification.

I am much closer to the Roksan budget than the other system - but in direct comparison the Roksan is a pile of crud. If you don't directly compare - the Roksan is a fraking musically nice system - good treble sparkle - not bright - decent enough bass from the floorstanders - no irritating colourations, good timing speed articulation - a complete system that together is better than the sum of their parts. I would HIGHLY and strongly recommend that system to anyone in the budget or even several thousand above that budget. tremendous sound. But compared to the other system - it's missing just so much - and if you have the coin the Roksan just doesn't cut it.

[Ajani]

This is what I read "When the RM-200 was in the system, I wanted for nothing-and for $4,200, that's something."

To me he is saying this amp hangs in with very expensive amps and doesn't leaving him desiring for more expensive amps - or you could read - "as good as mega-buck amps he likes."

My experience is the best of the best costs large sums of money that cheap stuff doesn't approach.

Yesterday I went to a very nice shop selling several systems - One system (All Roksan from cartridge wires turntable to amp, CD player and speakers was about $8,000) and it sounded really good - I listened to Eva Cassidy jazz master CD and some Beethoven piano works. For the money it sounded very good. It sounded good period and if you didn't audition the rig in the next room where the cables were more expensive than the entire Roksan system you'd be hard pressed to really find fault with it.

The problem is that the next room while ludicrously expensive with ~$250,000 system is wholly and entirely on another level.

There is simply no way anyone with decent hearing (and even if you're 90% deaf) could walk out of the two rooms and draw any other conclusion. The notion of "multiple times" better is not the issue. It doesn't have to be multiple times better - it either does it for you or it doesn't. And while it would be great to bury my head in the sand and read a spec sheet on the Roksan gear and conclude well it's better because it measures as good if not better but it's still just pretending - justification upon justification.

I am much closer to the Roksan budget than the other system - but in direct comparison the Roksan is a pile of crud. If you don't directly compare - the Roksan is a fraking musically nice system - good treble sparkle - not bright - decent enough bass from the floorstanders - no irritating colourations, good timing speed articulation - a complete system that together is better than the sum of their parts. I would HIGHLY and strongly recommend that system to anyone in the budget or even several thousand above that budget. tremendous sound. But compared to the other system - it's missing just so much - and if you have the coin the Roksan just doesn't cut it.

To borrow Stereophile terminology (with my own definition) that's what I'd call a Class B setup - A system that sounds great once you don't directly compare it to something better... That's the kind of setup I aim for... There should be nothing obviously lacking or irritating about the sound... You just enjoy the music and would never realize anything is wrong with what you're hearing, unless you directly compare to something much better...

That kind of system can be accomplished without winning the lottery or filing for bankruptcy...

[RGA]

Ajani

Agreed - I prefer reviewing gear in this price range because frankly I believe I would get more readers. $100,000k amps are all nice and fine but few people buy them and frankly they SHOULD be terrific. There is no great difficulty in building anything to a high level when budgets are "open."

The trick is doing what the Roksan system does while not spending large sums - take the turntable out of it and it's a $6k system. And I don't much like SS and even I liked it. This is a system (speakers, amp, CD and cables) that does it mostly right and doesn't fatigue the ear and the speakers don't get in the way like many do. Now I didn't throw everything at it but voice and piano - does a good job of that chances are it's on the right track. I will go back again and perhaps ask to review the whole system.

Now if they could get something cheap to sound like system 2 I would be amazed. But the big tube amps always seem to cost a bomb.

[Hyfi]

This is what I read "When the RM-200 was in the system, I wanted for nothing-and for $4,200, that's something."

To me he is saying this amp hangs in with very expensive amps and doesn't leaving him desiring for more expensive amps - or you could read - "as good as mega-buck amps he likes."

My experience is the best of the best costs large sums of money that cheap stuff doesn't approach.

Yesterday I went to a very nice shop selling several systems - One system (All Roksan from cartridge wires turntable to amp, CD player and speakers was about $8,000) and it sounded really good - I listened to Eva Cassidy jazz master CD and some Beethoven piano works. For the money it sounded very good. It sounded good period and if you didn't audition the rig in the next room where the cables were more expensive than the entire Roksan system you'd be hard pressed to really find fault with it.

The problem is that the next room while ludicrously expensive with ~$250,000 system is wholly and entirely on another level.

There is simply no way anyone with decent hearing (and even if you're 90% deaf) could walk out of the two rooms and draw any other conclusion. The notion of "multiple times" better is not the issue. It doesn't have to be multiple times better - it either does it for you or it doesn't. And while it would be great to bury my head in the sand and read a spec sheet on the Roksan gear and conclude well it's better because it measures as good if not better but it's still just pretending - justification upon justification.

That is what I miss so much about Soundex going out of business. They had 22 sound rooms. 1st floor was all 2 channel and the 2nd floor was 80% HT, along with the "Rocksan" range setups.

Room #1 was always the mega buck setup from Krell, Levinson, Wilson, full Dynaudio Arbiter setup and so on. I used to take a few disks there on Saturdays and just wander around playing my disks.

One of my favorite rooms was BAT with Pro-Ac speakers and usually a high dollar turntable. That room sounded as good or better than some of what they setup in room 1.

But, RGA is right, when you have the chance to walk from an 8K room to a 250K room, you will hear a difference and usually a pretty significant one at that.

One of my old tricks when my system wasn't so pleasing, was to go for a ride in the car with a crappy cassette. When I got back, the stereo sounded fine again....for a while.

[Poultrygeist]

We've all heard how prohibitively expensive a Ford would be if it were assembled from dealer parts shelves. With ubber high end amps just the opposite is the case.

After a few grand for parts you've reached the point of diminishing returns with amps. There's only so many Black Gates, Mundorf's, or heavy iron that can be crammed into one chassis. The only thing exotic about boutique amps is the price and certainly not the cost/quality of parts or technology.

[RGA]

Poultrygeist

Unfortunately parts quality matters - the easy way to hear this is to hear two amps with identical designs and tubes but one uses better parts than the other. The differences can be staggering. Turntables are a prime example of this - easy to detect pretty much immediately.

Virtually everything has a 10-1 retail price to manufacturer cost ratio in the high end. Sometimes better at the lower end - though sometimes not. I remember my $300 B&W 302 speakers someone ripped apart and priced at $30. Granted there was no account of labour or R&D and marketing which is all more expensive than the parts.

[mlsstl]

The urge to feel superior to others is hard-wired into humans. Snobbery is just one form of that - the ability to afford expensive gear others cannot puts a person in an exclusive club.

Meanwhile, the DIYers feel superior because they possess an understanding and ability to make for themselves what others can't. The bargain hunter or smart shopper feels superior for not getting suckered into buying gear that is often expensive as a result of appearance, hand-crafting or other features that contribute nothing to sound quality. Still others are proud of their ability to focus on the music and hear the composer's or artist's intent regardless of sound quality; they perhaps picture themselves mirroring Beethoven's great mind in mentally imagining perfect music in spite of hearing or playback limitations.

In short, every segment of this (or any other) hobby relishes the approach they are taking. Sometimes the display of superiority is conscious and ostentatious, while it resides more at the subconscious level in others. (Ever met anyone who was annoyingly superior in their display of humbleness?) ;-)