Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 121
  1. #76
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    Just to clear things up...

    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    ....but to suggest that because Florian did not state "music appreciation" in his criteria somehow puts him in this category is somewhat overreaching in my opinion.
    I'm afraid you've misread Mr. Woochifer, I don't see where he suggests or implies that Florian belongs to this category of technophiles in his post...

  2. #77
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808

    Yep, a mixup on my part.

    Agreed, I confused your comments about technophiles with his, therefore apologies to Mr. Woochifer on that point , However I do not think I misread him on the second part of that paragraph, so the second part of the last paragraph of my previous post stays.

  3. #78
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Actually I think Audiophile is a tem that strictly means Lover(phile) of Audio...being an audiophile itself has nothing to do with loving music.

    The one point Woochifer made that I disagree with is that he's pulling a similar superiority complex with what is called good music and what I and florian get hit with on what is good sound reproduction. people can love both music and systems -- and even if they love what Woochifer concludes as musicians as hacks people still may love them -- Remember the Beatles were Hacks to many and to someone like Skeptic(soundmiond) every rock, country,pop singer in the history of time are hacks, so is John Coltrane to him and most of the rest of Jazz if not all of it.

    I think there are plenty of people who buy software to show off to their friends how great their system is - or they buy "audiophile approved" recordings to go shop for speakers etc. i bought Patricia Barber Cafe Blue based off it being considered a great recording - it isn't really but that's another issue --- I like female vocals and basically figured it'll probably be good.

    After a while it's all just a big mine is better than yours shouting match -- or you only like X because you like innacurate fuzzy sound while ME I chose the technologically advanced Y, and back and forth it goes over and over year in year out and no one gives an inch anyway so you wonder where your life went.

    I was buying a record and a cd today at my local used shop and I was tapping my foot to the music they had on get into it while browsing -- I look aup at the speaker and it's stuck on a shelf -- the speaker is part of an Aiwa mini system(ghettoblaster) and hey isn't PRAT the thing that gets you going? Being a music lover and being an audiophile are NOT the same thing -- I can listen to all my CD's quite happily on my laptop with those cheap earbud speakers

    --- The Audiophile buyng of stereos is more about having an incredinbly anal outlet ---- interestingly my personality type is so totally not like it is when it comes to Audio (here I border on a type A personality scary.

  4. #79
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    I consider this discussion with you at an end, for the simple reason of overreaction. You asume to much, and listen not enough. I was not putting myself into any category,i was simply stating what i think. If you cant handle another persons opinion, than i guess your in the wrong place.

    -Flo
    For someone who's been painting the world with such broad strokes on this thread ("true" audiophiles are this, Italian tubes are that, Japanese electronics are something else, all box speakers except these six brands are overrated, those who are not "true" audiophiles "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is"), it's quite a statement for you to tell someone that they're overreacting.

    I can handle other opinions and disagreement just fine. My contentions with your posts are about these presumptions that you make about other peoples' motivations and preferences. You don't share their preferences and priorities, so why would you have any insight as to whether whitepapers influence those preferences or how they don't know what "a speaker with a soul is"? In all my years in the audio hobby, I've never met a single person who bought a speaker based on reading a whitepaper.

    I stated on this thread that I've never been bowled over by the Apogees I've heard, so your reaction is to tell me that I'm "the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever." How do you know that? Have you polled every person who's ever listened to them? Ever talk to the sales rep at that store where my friend worked who shared my opinion of the Apogees, or two of my friends who had similar reactions during their listenings?

    And when you start saying stuff like "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible" how truthful is that? What if somebody heard the Scintilla and proclaimed a different speaker as the "closest to the real thing"? Does that make them a liar since the universal proclamation of "every single person" would no longer apply? Or are you hereby proclaiming that it's impossible to have a different opinion? Like I said, it's not the opinion, it's the presumption that's at issue here.

  5. #80
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Woochifer

    I have to admit your last response to Florian -- well when i see it from the outside looking in I can only imagine what an ASS I must come across as much of the tiime. Rolls eye at self

    Working it on guys.
    It's always a work in progress. Good to see that you're making headway. LOL

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    The one point Woochifer made that I disagree with is that he's pulling a similar superiority complex with what is called good music and what I and florian get hit with on what is good sound reproduction. people can love both music and systems -- and even if they love what Woochifer concludes as musicians as hacks people still may love them -- Remember the Beatles were Hacks to many and to someone like Skeptic(soundmiond) every rock, country,pop singer in the history of time are hacks, so is John Coltrane to him and most of the rest of Jazz if not all of it.
    Okay, I'll fess up to this one. You're probably right in that I'm conveying a superiority complex about what constitutes good music. I guess I've heard one too many Amanda McBroom albums at audio demos to think straight on this point.

    Another way of putting it is that there's plenty of great music out there that's poorly recorded, and that I'll listen to through a less than stellar audio system. If it's great music to my ears, then a substandard audio system does not make it any less so. The point of a decent audio system is to increase the enjoyment of the source material. Similarly, a good movie played through a crappy portable TV is still a good movie.

  6. #81
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    Speaking personally "dungeonlike, smoke filled club surrounded drunks in mosh pit" ruins the experience for me. I will rather enjoy my music in a more condusive atmosphere if it can be helped.
    For punk, alternative, and the various derivatives thereof, that just adds to the experience.


    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    I will rather enjoy John Coltrane, or any great musicianship for that matter, on the best available sonic medium where available, that is why I am in this hobby to listen to great musicianship at the highest fidelity possible. There is a finite amount of money I am willing to invest new music and I will rather invest it on good music with excellent sonic quality. I listen to a lot of excellent music on radio and satellite but when I want to invest my money in a piece of music, sonic quality is one of the qualities alongside musical talent I consider when making purchasing decisions.
    Sure, I don't disagree with the idea of putting the best foot forward possible for the music that we enjoy. However, I do not make most of my music buying decisions based on the audio quality. For example, I listen to a lot of electronica, but unfortunately most of it is poorly recorded and based on sampled loops. But, the audio quality does not detract from how I personally react to the music. If I enjoy the music, I'm not going to suddenly stop listening to it just because it's not recorded well. This isn't like classical music either where you got multiple interpretations of the same piece. If I want my mind to drift to Sasha's Xpander, I have to go with the original version because there's no one out there doing a remake using DSD streaming.

    When given an option, in plenty of cases I'll opt for the best possible audio quality. That's why I have half-speed mastered LPs, 96/24 DADs, and various remastered CDs in my collection. But, I'm not going to go the extra step of buying albums that sound great at the expense of the music itself (exceptions being a few demo discs that I've bought over the years such as The Sheffield Track Record).

    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    ** Appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced. **

    This comment is an oxymoron in this hobby, if it were not, we will not bother with investing in quality music production software or hardware at all, afterall we should appreciate good music "regardless of how it get reproduced". I can appreciate good music with poor sonic quality, but I will appreciate it much more with excellent sonic quality. Some music fans indeed enjoy great music on less than optimal setups, however audiophiles make a concious decision to invest in above bar quality music reproduction to enjoy excellent sonic quality as an additional benefit to great musicianship, so ** "regardless of how it get reproduced". ** is overreaching in this instance.
    It's not an oxymoron because to me great music is still great whether I hear it through a cheap boombox or through a million dollar reference system. Besides I was primarily responding to Florian's contention that music appreciation comes with being an audio enthusiast or audiophile, and I simply don't agree that the two go hand in hand.

    Sure, I'd prefer to hear it through a decent system, but I'm not going to shut something off just because the playback system is less than ideal. I don't think it's "overreaching" to say that "appreciation of music is about the enjoyment of the music at its core, regardless of how it gets reproduced." Some friends of mine who are big time music buffs (these guys have an overwhelming knowledge of music from all genres, and a genuine passion for it) enjoy it on what most audiophiles would regard as substandard music systems. But, how does their choice of audio systems make them any less appreciative of music in general than somebody who invested more than them on the hardware side?

    At home, I've built a system that for my preferences represents the best audio quality within my budget. Listening through that system and other decent quality systems of course adds to the enjoyment. For the past couple of years, I've lived with a less than ideal turntable cartridge. Now that I've replaced it with a better cartridge, I have been listening to my LPs more than before, but it's not like my vinyl collection sat idle before either. Conversely, if the playback is music that I can't stand to listen to, the sound quality won't matter one bit.

    The main point that I was making was that appreciation of music and appreciation of sound quality/audio reproduction are not a one-to-one correlation. As I mentioned, I know plenty of music enthusiasts who are passionate about the music, but are less than passionate about how it sounds. Conversely, there are others I've met who obsess about the sound quality, without having any appreciation for the music itself.

  7. #82
    Forum Regular thepogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Hayes, Va
    Posts
    490

    Linn...

    I forget the model but it could be tri-amped and it listed for 12K...I though the smaller B&W sounded better...

    I fdor one really enjoyed the ML's...but they goota be set up correctly...and if they are...whew...nothing like some 'stats'...

    Peace, Pogue
    • Mark Levinson No. 27
    • Musical Fidelity 308cr
    • Martin Logan Prodigy's
    • Ariel Acoustics 10-T
    • Rega Planet CD
    • CJ Premier 9 DAC
    • Linn LP12 - Basik Plus - Valhalla
    • Benz Micro Cart.
    • Akai GX 747 Reel to Reel
    • Straight Wire Virtuoso Interconnects

  8. #83
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    It's always a work in progress. Good to see that you're making headway. LOL



    Okay, I'll fess up to this one. You're probably right in that I'm conveying a superiority complex about what constitutes good music. I guess I've heard one too many Amanda McBroom albums at audio demos to think straight on this point.

    Another way of putting it is that there's plenty of great music out there that's poorly recorded, and that I'll listen to through a less than stellar audio system. If it's great music to my ears, then a substandard audio system does not make it any less so. The point of a decent audio system is to increase the enjoyment of the source material. Similarly, a good movie played through a crappy portable TV is still a good movie.
    Agreed -- I am sick and tired of dealers with their specialty recordings and then trying to claim their stereo is so great it makes normal recording totally unlistenable. I am hoping to go to the CES in 2006 (graduate finally after 13 years) and that's my present to me. And I know one room where the guy will play anything and everything from Grieg played by Grieg to Nirvanna to whatever else.

    it's funny you mention McBroom -- that was the other artist along with Katrina Gauvin that were "audiophile" recoridngs -- I got barber becausse she is the only one they carry at the cd stores.

    The Cafe Blue album has been released on Vinyl -- $74.99 man?

  9. #84
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by drseid

    But what exactly is a "true" audiophile exactly?

    From my experience, an 'audiophile' = somebody who spends $3000+ on a pair of two way speakers, $1000 on cables/interconnects, or, thinks a speaker that dives like a shot shot duck below 45hz is "full range".

    My nominees for the topic at hand:

    Snell - The brand name even sounds like it would appeal to audio snobs. Although Snell has fallen out of the spotlight the past several years, they were among the masters at 'big box / little driver' speaker design, and knew how to market them. While I've laughed at salesmen pushing Cerwin Vega's using such revered technical jargon as "da Bomb" and "balz", at least the Cerwin's didn't make me yawn like a pair of Snell B minors did.

    Definitive Technology - I heard a pair of BP-20's back in the 90's when they first hit the scene, and was amazed by them. Neutral, dynamic, and that awesome soundstage only rivaled by planars. Regretfully, current DT designs suffer from 'boom truck' bass quality, and horribly choppy frequency response likely the result of low end drivers and crossovers. It's a real shame what has happened to DT. I believe this leaves only Mirage in that genre', and I find their sonic quality only marginally better.

    Martin Logon - nuff said.

    Honorable mention - Any two way conventional cone speaker bigger than two feet tall. I don't care who makes them.

  10. #85
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Well I can't argue with the Snell B Minor or most any Snell after Snell died -- The B-minor was a boring speaker and considering the side firing subwoofer (12inch) and multi way design and the size of the speaker -- you would think it would be better --- after all it was a highly touted Stereohhile Class B rated full range speaker

  11. #86
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    For someone who's been painting the world with such broad strokes on this thread ("true" audiophiles are this, Italian tubes are that, Japanese electronics are something else, all box speakers except these six brands are overrated, those who are not "true" audiophiles "hide and praise whitepapers and dont even know what a speaker with a soul is"), it's quite a statement for you to tell someone that they're overreacting.

    I can handle other opinions and disagreement just fine. My contentions with your posts are about these presumptions that you make about other peoples' motivations and preferences. You don't share their preferences and priorities, so why would you have any insight as to whether whitepapers influence those preferences or how they don't know what "a speaker with a soul is"? In all my years in the audio hobby, I've never met a single person who bought a speaker based on reading a whitepaper.

    I stated on this thread that I've never been bowled over by the Apogees I've heard, so your reaction is to tell me that I'm "the first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever." How do you know that? Have you polled every person who's ever listened to them? Ever talk to the sales rep at that store where my friend worked who shared my opinion of the Apogees, or two of my friends who had similar reactions during their listenings?

    And when you start saying stuff like "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible" how truthful is that? What if somebody heard the Scintilla and proclaimed a different speaker as the "closest to the real thing"? Does that make them a liar since the universal proclamation of "every single person" would no longer apply? Or are you hereby proclaiming that it's impossible to have a different opinion? Like I said, it's not the opinion, it's the presumption that's at issue here.
    You asked for my opinion, and thats what you got. Either take it, or leave it. How can you argue with my opinion ? If i were saying that these were facts, then yes. But you cant argue with a personal opinion.
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  12. #87
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    You asked for my opinion, and thats what you got. Either take it, or leave it. How can you argue with my opinion ? If i were saying that these were facts, then yes. But you cant argue with a personal opinion.
    Like I said, I'm not arguing opinion. I'm arguing presumption, which has the pretense of fact attached to it. When you react to my opinion by telling me that I'm the "first person to describe the Apogee's in that way that, ever" or "every single person that has heard the Scintilla or owned one that you can read about state that it is closest to the real thing that is possible," you had damn well better be able to back that up because those sure as hell read like factual statements, rather than mere opinions. I'm simply calling your bluff since blanket statements like that only serve to marginalize opinions that you disagree with. I can handle disagreement, but you don't seem to like having unsubstantiated blanket statements called out for the exaggerations that they are.

  13. #88
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Give me a break.
    My statment was true, because you are the first i ever encountered that claims such characteristics from an Apogee speaker. I dont know anyone who ever said the same thing. No review ever mentioned anything like the characteristics you mentioned.

    Besides, i have no problem with you listening to what you like. I am content, since there is no other system i have ever heard i would trade for mine. The RM30 is one of the best box speakers i know, and the big Apogee is a dream....and i have it. I could seriously care less if you believe what i said or not. But placing Apogee, Wilson etc.. among the most overrated speakers thread shows the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems in my opinion. I always read from you that a 2K system can sound better than one for 20K, well what if the 20K system was just as nicely matched as the 2K system ....than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.

    -Flo
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  14. #89
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.
    -Flo
    Flo,

    If High End is not High Fidelity that is "Hi-Fi" then what is the point? Does the High End now depart from higher fidelity. Indeed I have heard dealer say this however I regard it as arrogant misrepresentation, I accept that a well matched good quality 20K system is will sound better than a well matched good quality 2K system, all things being equal, by reason of higher fidelity.

  15. #90
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    I think that the word HIFI has gotten a new meaning. If High End is simply Higher Fidelity than yes HIFI is equal to High End. But i think that HIFI is now used for commercial systems.

    -Flo
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  16. #91
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    41

    Over-rated...

    IMHO:
    Bose
    B&W
    Paradign
    And yes, Magnepan
    Remember, the question was over-rated, not "good" or "bad".

  17. #92
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    I think that the word HIFI has gotten a new meaning. If High End is simply Higher Fidelity than yes HIFI is equal to High End. But i think that HIFI is now used for commercial systems.
    -Flo
    I suppose you meant that "HIFI" means entry-level and some lower middle-level setups, since most systems apart from DIY are commercial i.e. available for sale or order on the open market. Saying that the dealer in question also used it to refer the setups I did not like, a strange twist since it meant that what is HIFI to me may not be HIFI to you.

  18. #93
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    Roflmao

    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    My statment was true, because you are the first i ever encountered that claims such characteristics from an Apogee speaker. I dont know anyone who ever said the same thing. No review ever mentioned anything like the characteristics you mentioned.
    And yet there surely exists people who have opted NOT to buy the Apogee's in favor of something else...I find it funny that you spend so much time defending YOUR opinion, but you seem to find it perfectly acceptable to reject and attack Woochifer's opinion...Tell us, oh exhalted one, on what grounds do you hold that your opinion is better than anyone elses?
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    But placing Apogee, Wilson etc.. among the most overrated speakers thread shows the lack of knowledge and envy for people with high pricetag systems in my opinion.
    And a statement like this demonstrates an unfortunate characteristic on your part. Envy? Good lord, do you really think people want to be like you, that they spend much of their time wishing they owned 20K systems. You seem to take great pleasure in mentioning the price you paid for your system earlier...Did it make you feel good? Personally, I pity people that feel the need to spend $20,000 in order to enjoy music. IMO, they've missed the point. Music and audio, whether they are the same or not, is NOT exclusive to the elite pillars of society. Having heard my fair share of $20,000, $100,000, and higher pricetag systems, I can comfortably say it takes a certain amount of neurosis mixed with creativity to justify some of these pricetags.
    Envy? Is that criteria in your definition of Audiophile? Do you consider the ability of equipment to generate envy when shopping for gear?
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    I always read from you that a 2K system can sound better than one for 20K, well what if the 20K system was just as nicely matched as the 2K system ....than you would realize the difference between HIFI and High End.
    You assume too much. If only you knew the fantastic markup on a $20,000 system, you wouldn't be so quick to write off the comparability of a $2000 system. There gets to be a point where you can continue to throw as much money as you want at the system and the improvements are so small they become arguably imaginary.

    You sir, have a bad, "my gear is better than your gear, therefor I am superior to you" attitude. This unfortunately overshadows any merit your arguments may have.

  19. #94
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Personally, I pity people that feel the need to spend $20,000 in order to enjoy music. IMO, they've missed the point. Music and audio, whether they are the same or not, is NOT exclusive to the elite pillars of society. Having heard my fair share of $20,000, $100,000, and higher pricetag systems, I can comfortably say it takes a certain amount of neurosis mixed with creativity to justify some of these pricetag
    No need to pity anybody, kexodusc, it is simply matter of personal choice, If an individual has the disposable income to buy a USD100K setup and proceeds to do so, it is their perogative and there is no neurosis involved whatsoever. Yes, music is not exclusive to the Elite pillars of the society, however the wherewithal to acquire the best equipment to reproduce is not available to everybody though everyone is entitled to enjoy it on whatever setup they desire or can afford, no need to sneer at those who can afford more, whether the markup on high value systems is much higher is irrelevant, if knowledgeable care and attention is paid to matching a USD20K system, it will sound superior to a USD2K system as a matter of fact. To push the issue further, how about if an individual can afford to spend 20K on a DIY (i.e. 20K solely on parts etc) system and he has the requisite expertise to put together a system with parts and labour of that value, will your comments still hold at all?

  20. #95
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    No need to pity anybody, kexodusc, it is simply matter of personal choice, If an individual has the disposable income to buy a USD100K setup and proceeds to do so, it is their perogative and there is no neurosis involved whatsoever. Yes, music is not exclusive to the Elite pillars of the society, however the wherewithal to acquire the best equipment to reproduce is not available to everybody though everyone is entitled to enjoy it on whatever setup they desire or can afford, no need to sneer at those who can afford more, whether the markup on high value systems is much higher is irrelevant, if knowledgeable care and attention is paid to matching a USD20K system, it will sound superior to a USD2K system as a matter of fact.
    STOP! You can have all the knowledge and care in the world put into that 20K system, and the undeniable truth remains it may not sound any better than the 2K system. Please define "better". "Better" to whom? What standards are we using here? I'm pretty sure you know, TAH, that a great deal of subjectivity is involved in assessing an audio system. I know I can speak for a lot of members when I say we've heard "carefully" constructed, 20K systems sound 18K too expensive. It's possible a 20K system might sound a bit better, might sound a lot better...18K better? Again, that's a subjective call, but to maintain this is a universal truth is, ahem, "overreaching" IMO. This is where I believe neurosis settles in...I'm not free of this problem with other indulgences in my life, but there's something undeniably irrational when we consciously spend X times more money for x/100 the improvement in performance...

    I don't presume to prevent people from spending 100K on a system - it's their money and their business...but I maintain that these people, whether they admit it or not, are satisfying more than just a desire for accurate musical playback, at whatever levels those may be. There's an intangible feel-good attribute that comes with owning prestigious gear. There's a point where these items do become, in part, "trailer-queens". I'll admit to being guilty of this in other hobbies in my life, but I won't deny it. Materialism at it's worst. At some point, perhaps not 20 K, more than just sound influences the decision to buy...

    Quote Originally Posted by theaudiohobby
    To push the issue further, how about if an individual can afford to spend 20K on a DIY (i.e. 20K solely on parts etc) system and he has the requisite expertise to put together a system with parts and labour of that value, will your comments still hold at all?
    Absolutely. Interesting you should bring my DIY hobby into this...may I ask why? What, did you expect me to say, "Geez, you know I never thought of that? Sign me up for some of that 20K DIY project experience".

    I would consider any DIY project that approached 20K to be borderline ridiculous, and I know a few DIY'ers that will admit their own 7K projects were excercises in over-indulgence. What was the goal, "to build a system with the most expensive components I could find?" Please...
    ...only my opinion, but since opinion is being thrown around as cannon here, I think I'll use this to my advantage.

    I absolutely do pity them. I feel very fortunate to not feel the need to spend so much money on a system for the purpose of accurate playback...I don't know what the limit is, I do know I haven't hit it...but damn, if you're spending 20K, 40K, 100K, and still haven't satisfied whatever needs you have for audio playback, then I do pity you...There's no other word for it...that's a pile of money that I'm sure could be put to better use for almost anyone. If there's nothing else you'd rather spend that last 40 K on when you already have a 20K system, then I think you need to get out and see the world a bit more. There's a point where I return to the lowly "mainstream" and just don't "get it" I guess...20K is probably close to it...and I'm proud to admit this. Yup, pity is the right word...to some, being able to do more with more is admirable, but me, I prefer to do more with less.
    Call me neurotic.

  21. #96
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808

    With sadness kexodusc you are caught up in twisted thinking

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    STOP! You can have all the knowledge and care in the world put into that 20K system, and the undeniable truth remains it may not sound any better than the 2K system.
    Give me a break already, all things being equal, a thoughtfully assembled 20K system WILL sound better than a 2K system. I am specifically referring to addressing specific needs of a given individual subjective or otherwise, with requisite expertise, USD2K or USD20K, the 20K system WILL sound better, if you suggest otherwise you are simply in denial.

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    but damn, if you're spending 20K, 40K, 100K, and still haven't satisfied whatever needs you have for audio playback, then I do pity you...
    It is not matter of satisfaction, but increased satisfaction and that point is determined by each person individually. Will they be satisfied with 1K system? Possibly, but why settle for that when you can afford 20K or more.

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    There's no other word for it...that's a pile of money that I'm sure could be put to better use for almost anyone. If there's nothing else you'd rather spend that last 40 K on when you already have a 20K system, then I think you need to get out and see the world a bit more.
    There is not much to say to this than to say I pity you, this is twisted thinking, blasting Florian for looking contemptuously at a 2K system and at the same time trying to justify sneering at those that can afford much more, even going as far as calling these individuals neurotic, I enjoy what I own but that does not stop me considering 20K+ speakers, much in the same way as I do not see anything wrong in buying Mercedes Mclaren at GBP250K or whatever I consider to be of value. For the purposes of the discussion, There are loads of speakers above the USD10K that I may yet decide to own, are some of them overpriced, certainly, but does that bother me, not in the slightest? If anyone is able and willing to spend 100K on a system, more power to them.

    At the end of the day, as the saying goes here, it is only money. Try not to get caught up in what folks spend on their system, boasting that you do not think a 80K system is worth it or not as the case may be is neither here or there. We can all make do with much less in many things, but I am happy that I can have much more, audio reproduction equipment included.
    Last edited by theaudiohobby; 04-14-2005 at 08:40 AM.

  22. #97
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025

    You cut me, TAH, you cut me deep

    It's difficult to discuss issues with someone who picks and chooses which points in an argument they will acknowledge and respond to, and decides when to take obvious idioms literally .
    Safe to say I feel you've missed my point altogether.

    Let me be clear:
    I don't believe a person spending 20K or more on a system is neurotic by the standard definition...(though it was a very cool word to use at the time). I don't "sneer" at them, or look down upon them, as they look down upon the kid with the $1000 system. Rather, I pity them, as I said, for the extreme difficulty and great costs required for them to be happy.

    I don't deny the increased satisfaction a person might feel when buying a 100K system.

    I challenge that a 100K system is always better than say, a 50K system, or 20K system, even ceterus paribus. At 100K, I feel there are other factors than "sound" alone that come into play...Who's to say the intrinsic value of all 3 of these carefully crafted systems isn't only $4000? To imply a carefully crafted 100K system is better than 20K system all the time would suggest that every being on this planet would choose the 100K system over the 20K system, every single time. I'm quite sure that is as close to an absolute impossibility as we can have.


    I maintaint that the assumption that cost and performance are strongly and directly correlated is a poor assumption to make. You ever chosen one similarly priced speaker over another?

    I do have issue with the fact that those who spend more are somehow enlightened as to what sounds good, and bad, more so than a person with a 1K system.

    The only issue with Florian I have is the "holier than thou" attitude he, as a moderator, seems to adopted in this thread.

  23. #98
    It's just a hobby
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    808

    Good that you toned down your opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    It's difficult to discuss issues with someone who picks and chooses which points in an argument they will acknowledge and respond to, and decides when to take obvious idioms literally .
    Safe to say I feel you've missed my point altogether.
    I generally take selected issues when I respond to posts so that I do not bugged down in trivia, apologies if you felt I took words too literally. In this case, the whole tone of your post was comtemptuous of those who spend a lot of money, more than what you deem acceptable, on their audio equipment. I highlighted idioms that I felt captured the overall tone of your post.
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    I don't believe a person spending 20K or more on a system is neurotic by the standard definition...(though it was a very cool word to use at the time). I don't "sneer" at them, or look down upon them, as they look down upon the kid with the $1000 system. Rather, I pity them, as I said, for the extreme difficulty and great costs required for them to be happy.

    I don't deny the increased satisfaction a person might feel when buying a 100K system.

    I challenge that a 100K system is always better than say, a 50K system, or 20K system, even ceterus paribus. At 100K, I feel there are other factors than "sound" alone that come into play...Who's to say the intrinsic value of all 3 of these carefully crafted systems isn't only $4000? To imply a carefully crafted 100K system is better than 20K system all the time would suggest that every being on this planet would choose the 100K system over the 20K system, every single time. I'm quite sure that is as close to an absolute impossibility as we can have.

    I maintain that the assumption that cost and performance are strongly and directly correlated is a poor assumption to make. You ever chosen one similarly priced speaker over another?
    There is correlation between price and performance, however the law of diminishing returns applies more forcefully as you climb the ladder, and in this respect audio is not different from many other items. To put it to you pointedly that median value of USD2K is simply a line drawn in the sand. As I maintain that a USD20K put together with requisite expertise will absolutely sound superior to a USD2K system within reason. Whether you feel the improvements worth the extra 18K is another matter entirely, showing contempt (pity, looking down or whatever word you use in its place) to those that think the improvements is worth the extra money in unacceptable and stinking thinking.

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    I do have issue with the fact that those who spend more are somehow enlightened as to what sounds good, and bad, more so than a person with a 1K system.
    I did not say anybody who can afford more than USD1K system is more enlighted, I said that they can increase their enjoyment of the music they like, improved sound quality if it matters to them, by investing more money in their audio reproduction equipment and better quality software where available.

    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    The only issue with Florian I have is the "holier than thou" attitude he, as a moderator, seems to adopted in this thread.
    Only to replace it with a "holier than thou" attitude of your own.
    Last edited by theaudiohobby; 04-14-2005 at 10:36 AM.

  24. #99
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc

    ? Good lord, do you really think people want to be like you, that they spend much of their time wishing they owned 20K systems. You seem to take great pleasure in mentioning the price you paid for your system earlier..
    Your funny, because i never said how much i spent. Yes my system has a new price of close to 20K. But i never paid that.....
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  25. #100
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Well this is the end of this discussion. I could enjoy a 500$ system, but why should I ? I have a 20K system and yes it will beat the crap out of any 2K system in regards to Transparency, Dynamics, Bass extionsion, holographic imaging, precision, life like sound etc...

    I one of the few that always support beginners and pictures in the gallery where the equiment is 500$. I have startet with a 45$ system.

    I can live with the fact that there are systems below 1K and i can live with the fact that there are 100K systems.

    And if you cant differentiate a 1K system to a 20K system, than thats good for you since you dont need to spend any more money.

    -Flo
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-14-2013, 08:44 AM
  2. Buying PSB? Read This!
    By IAmCanadian in forum Speakers
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 05:55 AM
  3. Review of Bose 901s
    By sam_pro in forum Speakers
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-06-2007, 07:31 AM
  4. bi-wiring
    By sleeper_red in forum Cables
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 02:47 PM
  5. RGA Reviews Page 3 - yes still more.
    By RGA in forum Speakers
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 09-11-2004, 05:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •