Why Buy Real HiFi...?

[GMichael]

I should have gotten that when i read the "cubes"

Oh well...funny anyways

Glad you liked it.

Anyways. I think Estat said what I agree with the most here. Everyone gets of the ride when they want to for their own reasons. For some (ok, most) it's the money. Others are happy with what they have. Still others don't care as much.

[E-Stat]

Glad you liked it.

I got your humor!

How could you ever win over people who already have the best?

As Florian indicated, I think it is largely a question of exposure. I think ultra high end systems, either music or HT, can give folks a notion of what is possible. Then plug in your level of interest and budget.

HP's super Maggie system with 20.1s in the front 3.6s in the rear, (2) MGCC centers and (4) Nola Thunderbolt subs driven by an Edge multichannel amp can change that perspective. Last time I was in Seacliff he played a part of the bimbo surfer movie "Blue Crush". The weight and impact of the waves was incredible. It wasn't rattling the rafters so much as begin felt. Zero strain. Very realistic. And yes the 8" Barco projector did a nice job, too!.

rw

[GMichael]

I got your humor!


As Florian indicated, I think it is largely a question of exposure. I think ultra high end systems, either music or HT, can give folks a notion of what is possible. Then plug in your level of interest and budget.

HP's super Maggie system with 20.1s in the front 3.6s in the rear, (2) MGCC centers and (4) Nola Thunderbolt subs driven by an Edge multichannel amp can change that perspective. Last time I was in Seacliff he played a part of the bimbo surfer movie "Blue Crush". The weight and impact of the waves was incredible. It wasn't rattling the rafters so much as begin felt. Zero strain. Very realistic. And yes the 8" Barco projector did a nice job, too!.

rw

The 20.1's and even the 3.6's are a little out of my budget. Well, I guess what I'm planning is too or it would be reality instead of a plan. But eventually, unless my tastes change, I plan on 1.6 mains and MGCC center, then MMGW's for surrounds and rears. And I'll have real amps by then. I like the Parasounds so far.

It's good to dream.

[Florian]

Florian's dreams:

• Apartment with one 60m2 room by the end of this year. Slanted ceeiling, no corners, white carpet.
• Fully Magnan Flatline cabled
• Foil only midrange ribbon
• Goldmund T3-F
• All powerlines dedicated with the PS Audio Powerplant

The Apartment and the foil only midrange is not difficult. The rest takes a bit

[E-Stat]

The 20.1's and even the 3.6's are a little out of my budget. Well, I guess what I'm planning is too or it would be reality instead of a plan. But eventually, unless my tastes change, I plan on 1.6 mains and MGCC center, then MMGW's for surrounds and rears. And I'll have real amps by then. I like the Parasounds so far.

Sounds like a great system.

I'm content with my modest HT system. NAD receiver, Polk mains/center Radio Shack rears and a pair of powered subs with a Behringer EQ.

rw

[GMichael]

Florian's dreams:

• Apartment with one 60m2 room by the end of this year. Slanted ceeiling, no corners, white carpet.
• Fully Magnan Flatline cabled
• Foil only midrange ribbon
• Goldmund T3-F
• All powerlines dedicated with the PS Audio Powerplant

The Apartment and the foil only midrange is not difficult. The rest takes a bit

Sounds like a great dream. But why not change the apartment into a house? Either that or you'll have a few unhappy people banging on your door.

[GMichael]

Sounds like a great system.

I'm content with my modest HT system. NAD receiver, Polk mains/center Radio Shack rears and a pair of powered subs with a Behringer EQ.

rw

Thanks, it will have to do double duty as my music source as well.

[Florian]

Sounds like a great dream. But why not change the apartment into a house? Either that or you'll have a few unhappy people banging on your door.

Well at 22 and beeing a teacher the cash wont stretch for a house yet :-) But an old building and a old apartment with tall ceelings will work just fine. The room acoustics will take care of the rest

[r m]

I would like to turn away from the financial cost of the components themselves and consider the time spent on this hobby, as this is a cost of sorts.

The least expensive element in our music systems is the recorded music.

Rather than spending my time researching the equipment would I be better off if I spend my time researching the music and listening to it?

Just a thought. Interesting thread thanks for the input. Now I shall get back to researching... only another two or three weeks before I can buy my system. Grrrr.

[GMichael]

I would like to turn away from the financial cost of the components themselves and consider the time spent on this hobby, as this is a cost of sorts.

The least expensive element in our music systems is the recorded music.

Rather than spending my time researching the equipment would I be better off if I spend my time researching the music and listening to it?

Just a thought. Interesting thread thanks for the input. Now I shall get back to researching... only another two or three weeks before I can buy my system. Grrrr.

Huh? Just play some music while you reseach. That way it won't feel like it's an expense.

[Bernd]

I would like to turn away from the financial cost of the components themselves and consider the time spent on this hobby, as this is a cost of sorts.

The least expensive element in our music systems is the recorded music.

Rather than spending my time researching the equipment would I be better off if I spend my time researching the music and listening to it?

Just a thought. Interesting thread thanks for the input. Now I shall get back to researching... only another two or three weeks before I can buy my system. Grrrr.

I somehow think that a love of music is a given before you embark on improving your system. If you "only" want to listen to music I am sure an i-pod or Mini system will do fine, but a good system will open your ears to more of what's on the disc and will encourage you to search out more music.
Time spent listening to music is certainly no expense for me but pure pleassure. So I am not quiet sure what your point is.

What components are you buying?

Peace

Bernd

[Resident Loser]

...your post is a bit confusing...

Do you find researching gear a cost?

I tend to look at time spent investigating things as an education and I've been involved in one way or another for 40yrs. Are you familiar with the jargon of the hobby? Do you know the meanings of, and how to interpret specs? Do you have an idea as to what you expect from any gear you might ultimately purchase? What do you require insofar as bells and whistles?

The research you do now will pay off in the long run...it will provide an understanding of the basics upon which you will be able to build...it will make you a more savvy consumer...caveat emptor! There is an awful lot of stuff out there that is snake oil, pure and simple...and sales people who can and do take advantage of unwary or uninformed customers.

I'm quite content with hearing a favorite piece on a portable mono radio...after all, it really is the music that matters...A step up would be my portable GPX CDP($7 after rebate) and my really old Sennheiser HD-414 'phones. With them, I get to choose the program material, but I'm tethered. Obviously as we travel up the chain there are improvements and/or flexibilities that are offered that will further enhance your listening experience. A quality $400-600 mini-system will provide around 90% or so of the performance level of a ne plus ultra, no-holds-barred, exotic one...however the cost will be appreciably more...ten to one hundred times more (in some cases) in order to achieve minimally incremental levels of improved performance

Perhaps you may find yourself looking for obscure Edison cylinders or SOTA players that will wring every available nuance out of them...vinyl?...particular composers?...conductors?...a specific genre?...native American flute music?...Want to collect vintage, classic Marantz or Mac gear?...or Caruso's single-sided 78s?...This pastime is pretty wide-ranging and diverse...you can be a gearhead or a music collector or enjoy any degree of combination of the two... it's really up to you to make the decision on your level of involvement...that's really the beauty of it all.

So as GM suggested, play some tunes and read on...

jimHJJ(...information and the ability to understand it is the real power...)

[Woochifer]

The problem with audio equipment today for the audio-loving but constrained consumer (like me), is that too much of it is aimed at the top market segment. This means value components are more difficult, (I didn't say impossible), to find.

Some of us are concerned that there is a decline in interest in hi-fi among younger people, (of whom I'm not). What to do? More makers need to create value components instead of just trying to skim the old, rich, foolish audiophiles.

As Kex mentioned elsewhere, it seems that the top end of the market and the entry level end have gotten the most attention in recent years, leaving a huge gap in the middle. I think part of this is that the advent of home theater has greatly reduced the middle tier in the audio-only market.

More consumers looking to piece together a system in that middle price range (from about $1,500 and up), nowadays will not dedicate that entire budget to a two-channel system. They are looking to build a multichannel system that will also function as their audio system. The evidence of this is very clear by looking at which independent audio stores have gone under and which have survived in the last 10 years. In the markets I'm familiar with, the stores that have gone out of business have generally been the ones that stuck with selling strictly two-channel components. The ones that survived and expanded were the ones that added home theater components and installation services to their product mix.

Audio stores have also survived by embracing the ever escalating price points for high end components, especially with the accessories and tweaking components. Richard Hardesty, who publishes the Audio Perfectionist journal has said that one of the worst trends in audio over the past 15 or so years has been the rise of what he refers to as the "silly segment" of the market -- basically components that function more as overpriced audio jewelry than products focused on solid engineering and sound quality. He's very much an adherent of two-channel analog high end audio, but feels that common sense and simple goals have gotten distorted by marketing practices and price points that keep going up but fail to improve upon the actual sound quality. He also makes the point that the attention and focus on this end of the market (as well as the attention that home theater gets) has driven a lot of people out of the audio hobby in recent years.

With young people, I'll repeat a point that I've made many times on this board -- young people are not going to sit at home and tether themselves down to an audio system. They want mobility, but that's nothing new. Today, they want their MP3 players, just as 25 years ago, they wanted their Walkmans and cassette tapes. And comparing a prerecorded cassette with a 128k MP3, the young people of today are generally getting far better sound quality than their counterparts did 25 years ago.

Component-based audio is a relatively small market, and always has been. Even back in the analog heyday, most people were listening to their music through standalone record changers or those all-in-one systems with the horrible BSR record changers dropped into the top of the unit. I don't think anyone who's ever heard them would argue that listening to an LP through one of those systems would sound better than a CD played through one of today's mini systems.

I think there is value out there in audio, and Kex correctly points out that the biggest change over the past 20 years has been in the entry level tier. If you inflation adjust the price points, I think you'd see huge improvements across the board. The Marantz 2275 receiver that I grew up with cost $600 in 1976, which is the equivalent of about $2,000 today. Think about how much two-channel amplification you can buy for that price nowadays. The sound quality that you now normally get with speakers in the $200 range would have been rare 20 years ago (especially if you deflate the price to what that $200 would have been worth back then).

If there is any decline in interest for hi-fi among young people, it might stem from the fact that you no longer have entry level equipment that sounds as bad as it did 20 or 30 years ago. A higher level of sound quality than before is just the norm, and doesn't require a special investment like it did back then. Then again, I'm not so sure that hi-fi has ever been all that large a market to begin with, and young people's interest in the hobby has always been marginal from what I've seen and experienced. Also, I think that the traditional market boundaries that defined the audio market simply don't mean as much because how people listen (at home, all over the house, in the car, on the go) and what they listen to (CDs, multichannel music, DVDs, MP3s, streaming media, other downloads) has evolved. It would only make sense that the hardware market follows how people actually intend to use it.

[E-Stat]

leaving a huge gap in the middle.

Guys,

Call me too much of an optimist, but I just don't agree. I find a vast increase in the availability of good stuff at virtually any price point.

I started this game in 1972 with a pair of Advents and an AR Integrated amp. Setting aside the source (for which CDs have clearly provided an incredible value improvement), I spent $210 for the speakers and $225 (discounted) for the 60 watt/channel amp. In today's dollars, that would be $945 for the speakers (before I purchased a second pair) and $1010 for the amp. That situation today would provide me literally dozens of choices for either providing darn good performance today. Every speaker uses film caps. Every amp with toroids, usually MOSFETs and miles away from the gross negative feedback debacle of that day. The AR amp sounded miserable at low levels. Heck, there are probably half a dozen different Canadian choices that were completely absent in 1972. Today, I would probably buy a DAC with gain controls and a far more powerful power amp for the same overall budget. Is this the "gap in the middle"?

Another system, circa 1976: Magneplanar MG-II speakers, Jensen FET-5 preamp (modified Dynaco PAT-5), Audire 100 watt/channel amp ($625 + $400 + $500) or inflation adjusted to ($2800 + $1800 + $2250). At the expense of stating the obvious, you could do quite well for $6850! Say Maggie 3.6Rs with a nice 400 watt amp?

I don't see that adjusting those numbers for multi-channel really cripples the choices or the quality. I might have to settle for 1.6s without the ribbon tweeter. Heck, I use a pair of Radio Shack Minimus 7s with "exotic" dome tweeters as rears in my HT! You can buy them on ebay for $40. Or splurge for an additional $16 and buy a crossover upgrade with air coil inductors and film caps.

rw

[Woochifer]

Guys,

Call me too much of an optimist, but I just don't agree. I find a vast increase in the availability of good stuff at virtually any price point.

I started this game in 1972 with a pair of Advents and an AR Integrated amp. Setting aside the source (for which CDs have clearly provided an incredible value improvement), I spent $210 for the speakers and $225 (discounted) for the 60 watt/channel amp. In today's dollars, that would be $945 for the speakers (before I purchased a second pair) and $1010 for the amp. That situation today would provide me literally dozens of choices for either providing darn good performance today. Every speaker uses film caps. Every amp with toroids, usually MOSFETs and miles away from the gross negative feedback debacle of that day. The AR amp sounded miserable at low levels. Heck, there are probably half a dozen different Canadian choices that were completely absent in 1972. Today, I would probably buy a DAC with gain controls and a far more powerful power amp for the same overall budget. Is this the "gap in the middle"?

Another system, circa 1976: Magneplanar MG-II speakers, Jensen FET-5 preamp (modified Dynaco PAT-5), Audire 100 watt/channel amp ($625 + $400 + $500) or inflation adjusted to ($2800 + $1800 + $2250). At the expense of stating the obvious, you could do quite well for $6850! Say Maggie 3.6Rs with a nice 400 watt amp?

I don't see that adjusting those numbers for multi-channel really cripples the choices or the quality. I might have to settle for 1.6s without the ribbon tweeter. Heck, I use a pair of Radio Shack Minimus 7s with "exotic" dome tweeters as rears in my HT! You can buy them on ebay for $40. Or splurge for an additional $16 and buy a crossover upgrade with air coil inductors and film caps.

rw

I see your point in that you do have plenty of choices at these price points. However, I still feel that the choices that you get with two-channel components above the entry level price points have diminished in recent years, compared to what I was seeing 25 years ago. For one thing, mass market retailers have largely abandoned the two-channel market, and most of the mass market brands invest their product development above the entry level lines towards home theater. 25 years ago, mass market companies like Kenwood, Marantz, and Yamaha still had full lineups of midlevel two-channel components, such as two-channel separates, and these products were easy to find even at chain stores.

Nowadays, you have to find an independent audio store if you're looking for middle market two-channel audio components. The chain stores now focus on entry level components on the audio side, and anything above that price point will likely incorporate home theater functions. And even a lot of the independent stores will have a substantial portion of their floor space devoted to home theater components, and won't have nearly as much focus on two-channel components as before. A perfect example of this is the difficulty I encountered just trying to replacement cartridge for my turntable. I was looking to spend about $200, and my choices were more limited at that price point than they were at the under $100 and $400+ price points at the stores I visited (that is, if they even carried cartridges in the first place).

You're right in that the middle market choices are still out there, but they're just a lot more difficult to track down than before and don't command nearly as large a share of the market. The saving grace for your optimism indeed is that you can typically attain a much greater level of quality for the price than before, especially if you inflation adjust the price points.

[E-Stat]

Nowadays, you have to find an independent audio store if you're looking for middle market two-channel audio components... A perfect example of this is the difficulty I encountered just trying to replacement cartridge for my turntable. I was looking to spend about $200, and my choices were more limited at that price point than they were at the under $100 and $400+ price points at the stores I visited (that is, if they even carried cartridges in the first place).

Two words: The Internet

While the Audio Technica OC-9 is a bit above that budget, the venerable Denon DL-103 fits right there. I had one many a moon ago. You may have to order it from the UK. So? That's where I found a pristine SME 3009 Series II (Improved) arm for my old Ariston.

rw

[Woochifer]

Two words: The Internet

While the Audio Technica OC-9 is a bit above that budget, the venerable Denon DL-103 fits right there. I had one many a moon ago. You may have to order it from the UK. So? That's where I found a pristine SME 3009 Series II (Improved) arm for my old Ariston.

rw

Yup, that's exactly what I wound up doing! But, it just illustrates how things have changed at the retail level and how the needs at the bottom and at the higher end seem better served than those more in the middle market. I used to always buy my replacement cartridges and belts from local stores, and that just doesn't seem feasible anymore. Most unfortunate because I want to support the remaining stores in my area. Since cartridges/stylii are items that wear out and require replacement, I could've been a regular customer. It's not like cables or headphones wear out and need regular replacement

[E-Stat]

Yup, that's exactly what I wound up doing! But, it just illustrates how things have changed at the retail level and how the needs at the bottom and at the higher end seem better served than those more in the middle market.

I don't disagree, but simply find that simply to be part of the changing paradigm of buying really anything today. While there is greater overall diversity, the impact of the local brick and mortar shop has diminished really for all but the top end. You can easily outshop the big boxes online for low end stuff as well. Or buy a car that way.

As for me, I don't find that to be a problem. I want something. I order online. It shows up at my door a couple of days later. Kewl.

My day job is a sales engineer for a developer of distribution software. I regularly give presentations to our user base and prospects alike discussing the significant changes that have occurred in the supply chain in only the past few years. At the expense of boring you, here are a few findings of a survey by a prominent consulting firm:

In 2003, only 25% of distributors under $50M had an eStorefront presence. By 2008, nearly 85% will join the larger firms with that capability. Do or die. Fully 30% of all business will be done over the internet. Considering the limited volume of the high end, this should come as no surprise.

rw

[bubslewis]

For starters, you're right the high-end makers are not, in general, frauds or crooks. They are simply exploiting the demand that exists. On the other hand, these makers like are like firms in most industries: they target the well-heeled, up-market consumer.

Why skim the market? I think you know, and comes back to my original point. The price elasticity for the rich consumer is much greater. They are much less constrained by a strict concept of value. And sometimes the contrary applies: things that are rare, unique, or just expensive become sought reason of exclusivity rather than performance. All this means that the maker can charge high prices giving himself a cushion against inefficiency and/or less than hoped for demand.

The problem with audio equipment today for the audio-loving but constrained consumer (like me), is that too much of it is aimed at the top market segment. This means value components are more difficult, (I didn't say impossible), to find.

Some of us are concerned that there is a decline in interest in hi-fi among younger people, (of whom I'm not). What to do? More makers need to create value components instead of just trying to skim the old, rich, foolish audiophiles.

[/FONT][/I]

OK, I'm on the board of directors at WALMART. I'm thinking to myself " What if we come out with a good speaker system that's affordable to all our millions of customers? We can hire a couple of experts for design and then add a building to the side of our widget factory in Chunking and mass produce these puppies. We could call it the WALplanar or maybe the WALribbon, or perhaps the WALmag".

" We've already got the shipping and distribution mega-network. We could have 360 pallets of these boys ready in 2 months. We put up a nice little room right next to our electronics section in all our stores. People just stroll in and are amazed how good the sound is. And the speakers only cost $499 a pair! Hell, we could throw in a decent WALamp and sell the package for $699."

Would this be a good thing or a bad thing? I'm sure we've all heard someone say how they'd really like some good speakers, etc. etc., but just didn't have the $. Now WALMART has made good (not great), affordable sound available to millions of audio-loving but constrained consumers. I'm sure that would be viewed as a good thing.

Of course, 6 months from now Magnapan would go out of business becuase the bottom dropped out of their sales for 1.2's and 1.6's and their other mid level stuff. Other small makers would find that their $1,500 speakers and $1,000 amplifiers suffering the same fate. I'm sure that would be viewed as not a good thing.

Unfortunately, making value components affordable is most easily achieved by mass production. WALMART can do but the little guys can't. Just like everything else.

[Feanor]

We put up a nice little room right next to our electronics section in all our stores. People just stroll in and are amazed how good the sound is. And the speakers only cost $499 a pair! Hell, we could throw in a decent WALamp and sell the package for $699."[/i]

Would this be a good thing or a bad thing? .... I'm sure that would be viewed as a good thing.

Of course, 6 months from now Magnapan would go out of business becuase the bottom dropped out of their sales for 1.2's and 1.6's and their other mid level stuff. Other small makers would find that their $1,500 speakers and $1,000 amplifiers suffering the same fate. I'm sure that would be viewed as not a good thing.

....

I would be a good thing. Of course, I'm assuming that there really is a market for low priced/high quality hi-fi equipment, viz. that up-market hi-fi's appeal isn't just its snobbish exclusivity.

Tough crap for the small manufacturers. It's survival of the fittest. Let's face it, Walmart has driven tens of thousands small retailers out of business; why worry about a few dozen audio equipment makers? And, I mean, you'd do all your manufacturing in China, but the most current makers are headed over there anyway.

[kexodusc]

I would be a good thing. Of course, I'm assuming that there really is a market for low priced/high quality hi-fi equipment, viz. that up-market hi-fi's appeal isn't just its snobbish exclusivity.

Tough crap for the small manufacturers. It's survival of the fittest. Let's face it, Walmart has driven tens of thousands small retailers out of business; why worry about a few dozen audio equipment makers? And, I mean, you'd do all your manufacturing in China, but the most current makers are headed over there anyway.

I'm all for small businesses and buying domestic, but I'm not going to buy a product solely for that reason. If another country can build something as good or better, and sell it for cheaper, I'm going to buy.
I feel bad for the small businesses, but that's life, there's no guarantees or entitlements.

My greatest hope is that competition really picks up in the next few years. Along with the "home theater revolution" of the past few years came more speaker companies than ever. I suspect that many 1st time HT buyers who bought Home Theater-In-A-Box systems will be looking to upgrade soon enough, and a good chunk of them will want something more. Probably a decent entry level system. Likewise, some of the people who previously bought entry levelish HT's out there from Paradigm, Polk, Energy, B&W etc might be looking to upgrade to something more "mid-fi" (man, I hate that term) or whatever as well.

Time will tell.

[emack27]

"All you need is a good pair of speakers. You'll get more miles from a new pair of sneakers!"

[emack27]

"All you need is a good pair of speakers. You'll get more miles from a new pair of sneakers!"

Words I wish I could live by.