No relationship between price and quality in HiFi?

[tube fan]

I find the mp3 vs hi-rez a bit hard to believe, especially if the listeners are experienced with both, as the compression to me is a dead give away. Sometimes to my ears mp3 sounds so strange from the original recording it's like the song was remixed.

Well, I was quite shocked as was my wife! To me, it was like comparing AM and FM radio.

[RGA]

The "house sound" is a good point. We finally agree on something The house sound of certain amps is why I have so much trouble believing people can't hear differences in DBT. Although something like Krell vs Levinson should be detectable it would certainly be more of a challenge than Krell vs Mac. Many find CJ and ARC totally different, so why would that change if blind folded.

Because of the Munson effect. Blind listening level matched can be important due to the level - louder is simply deemed better more often than not. Very few people bother to adjust for volume. Audio Note Cd players tend to be 6db quieter than other players which "always" puts the other player whatever it is in advantageous position. Indeed, turntables are typically many decibels quieter than CD players as phono inputs are not as "loud."

I have problems with DBT - but at the same time if someone claims like you have that Krell Blows Rotel away - then if that is true then everyone should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be able to choose the Krell on any music at any volume 100% of the time. So level match the two amps, put a black light at the stereo end of the room. Play some full range difficult music and ask the person to choose which amp is the Krell. Surely if there was a staggering difference between the two amps one should be able to choose the Krell - and yet no one has been able to - not reviewers, musicians, audiophiles.

That doesn't necessarily mean there are no differences or that with time one could not pick them apart but it does certainly discount the notion that the "blows it away, and way better comments" are complete BS. If it was so great a difference someone anyone somewhere at least once would be able to tell them apart enough to be credible. And that's why I personally would not spend over a certain point on solid state amplification.

[tube fan]

Don't assume that "experts" can correctly identify either wines or audio equipment blind. I have been to many blind tastings where a winemaker could not identify their own wine. Would you like to bet that producers of audio gear would always pick their units out from others (yes, matched for volume)?

At the 2010 CAS I got only a few demonstrators to turn up the volume to a realistic level. "Realistic", to me, is a similar level that you would hear live. The Audio Note room was an exception. One of the two AN demonstrators would play big band jazz, rock, trance, hip-hop, and classical at full realistic levels. In all my experience with digital, only the AN systems (here either a $5,500 or a $9,500 cd player) sounded realistic. What are they doing that others are not? Their cds did not sound bleached-out and two-dimensional.

[Mr Peabody]

So you are saying there was a DBT of Krell vs Rotel? I'd like to see that. Or, is this just another fabrication from the place you get your statistics from?

[Ajani]

The "house sound" is a good point. We finally agree on something The house sound of certain amps is why I have so much trouble believing people can't hear differences in DBT. Although something like Krell vs Levinson should be detectable it would certainly be more of a challenge than Krell vs Mac. Many find CJ and ARC totally different, so why would that change if blind folded.

As much as I can accept that persons prefer a certain house sound of some brands, there are still issues with that:

There are many brands with similar house sounds... So when one is selling for double the price of the other, chances are high you'll buy the cheaper option...

Also, even within the same brand, the question of value for money comes out... Take Revel for example; There is constant debate about whether someone should buy a Concerta F12 for $1,500 or spend $500 more to get the Performa M22 ($2,000)... However, in the UK, the F12 is priced at 900GBP while the M22 is 2,000GBP and "shock of shocks" the reviews over there (HiFi Choice & Home Cinema Choice) regard the M22 as being in a completely different category of sound from the MUCH cheaper F12...

So essentially, in the US where the price difference is small, the difference in sound quality is deemed to be small, yet in the UK where the price difference is large, the difference in sound quality is deemed to be large... That's price bias....

NOTE: I have no doubt that differences exist between components, but I believe that many of them are seriously over-exaggerated by audiophiles due to price bias.

[pixelthis]

THE ONLY MAJOR diff is speakers.
There is a "difference" but its non-linear, takes a lot more to go from high end to higher
than from low end to high.
IF YOU CAN RECOGNIZE this simple fact, you can get outstanding gear for a modest price.
Unless status is important to you, and you need speakers made from a tree on
the endangered species list.

[YBArcam]

People are also often swayed by price - if it costs more it must be better. While that is true a lot it isn't always.

I have never quite understood the appeal of Rega digital. I never really liked the Planet when it was getting raves and I never much liked their amplifiers. Maybe the new stuff is better and perhaps the Brit magazines kind of know Rega better and because they're used to the sound they are better at spotting the weaknesses compared to the Benchmark. The Rega review in Stereophile will only be useful if the reviewer has actually heard good quality DACs like the Benchmark in the sub $2k price class.

It's funny, just two days before you wrote this I decided to dump my Rega Apollo SE for a Simaudio Moon CD.5 (which I picked up yesterday). My dealer had lent me a Rega DAC, the Simaudio CD-1, and the Simaudio i-1, just to try these pieces out in my system. The CD-1 had a much better balance in my set up, and I loved the clear, detailed, and open sound. It just seemed to breathe easier than the Rega sources did, which sound a bit bloated by comparison. For what it's worth, I liked the Apollo SE better than the DAC (the Oppo BDP-93 as transport probably played a part in this). The Apollo SE is a very nice player, don't get me wrong, but I felt the difference with the Moon was noticeable. However, I preferred my Exposure amp to the Simaudio i-1.

I've had Rega digital sources for some time now, assuming they were the best at their price points without really trying much else. I'm glad I decided to. I almost didn't bother trying the CD-1, as I wasn't crazy about the Simaudio system I had heard once before, and I thought their big clock radio like display was goofy. One quickly gets over that kind of thing though, and I'm glad I decided to have an open mind to hearing it in my own home.

Getting to the issue of price/quality, I do think there is a relation. While it's true what some here have said, that price isn't always indicative of quality, I do believe that you have to spend a certain amount to hit a certain quality level. There are always exceptions, but when you hit the $1,000 - $1,500 level for new components, I think you tend to get a certain level of quality that is tough to find at the sub-$1,000 mark. Certainly as far as build quality goes, but I think for sound quality too. So this is the level I've tried to shoot for - my amp and CDP cost about $1,300 each, and my speakers cost $900 (but $2K when new). My turntable is another story, but I plan to upgrade there shortly (Rega P3-24, VPI Scout, or dare I go for a used LP12?). I love the sound I'm getting now and I hope I'm off the upgrade wagon for a while.

[Feanor]

• Is there a correlation between price and quality in hi-fi? Yes.
• Is it a strong correlation? Not really.
• Does the law of diminishing returns apply to hi-fi? Sure as heck.
• Are there bargains to be had that deliver ludicrous value? Yep!

A couple of examples from my recent experience:

1. Amplifier: Class D Audio SDS-258, <$600 assembled from a basic kit, here
2. DAC: Wolfson WM8740-based, from Hong Kong, $45, here

Both these show signs of, let's call it "cheapness". In one case it's a class D amp kit, in the other a naked PCB. But that does mean you don't get jaw-dropping sound for the money -- sound comparable to equipment 5x the price or more.

[pixelthis]

• Is there a correlation between price and quality in hi-fi? Yes.
• Is it a strong correlation? Not really.
• Does the law of diminishing returns apply to hi-fi? Sure as heck.
• Are there bargains to be had that deliver ludicrous value? Yep!

A couple of examples from my recent experience:

1. Amplifier: Class D Audio SDS-258, <$600 assembled from a basic kit, here
2. DAC: Wolfson WM8740-based, from Hong Kong, $45, here

Both these show signs of, let's call it "cheapness". In one case it's a class D amp kit, in the other a naked PCB. But that does mean you don't get jaw-dropping sound for the money -- sound comparable to equipment 5x the price or more.

A fun time for the hobbyist? YEAH. But a huge bargain? HARDLY.
Class D, assembled from a kit, no case. Lot of cool kits on this site, tho.
BUT not quite proven class D, and your system looks like a science project.
THESE days you can get 125wpc for 250 bucks in a cool package.
FOR six hundred bucks you can get an Adcom. HARDLY a bargain.
My 125wpc 250 dollar "bargain", complete with real power supply, incl toroidal
transformer, below .
Of course a hand built amp from Europe somewhere is going to cost a small fortune,
and compared to that your kit is a great bargain.
But you don't compare it to that. YOU COMPARE it to cheap mass market stuff from CHINA, which is a HUGE bargain.
GREAT time to be into audio.