to Axomoxa, I should have added ... although well intentioned. Tubegroover, as I said earlier, we all bring our own biases into this issue. Maybe some rich people are status motivated, but so are many non rich people. In the case of my friend, he is the least pretentious person I know. Must someone always do what you think is "better" to gain approval? Unless you were in a position to have whatever you want, and do whatever you want it is very hard to be sure what you might do or think in that situation. Some of the best products in history are now considered works of art. Tiffany and Ferrari are two examples which come to mind. Also, at one time a "millionaire" was a big deal, now it is a "billionaire". To some, $75,000 is not that much money. It is a lot to me, but I would certainly spend that much or more on a home theater/audio system if I had the means. That would not make me one bit less of a "good" person, just a good person with a great stereo. |
It is always relative. Anyone who thinks any amount is "too much" is only putting their own bias into their opinion. I have one rich friend who has not one, but two "cost is no object" dream systems, (one for the city and one for the country). They sounds incredible. He also happens to be extremely big hearted and generous with his time and money toward many charities, so why should he deny himself the pleasure of the "best" sound reproduction? Axomoxa, you couldn't be more wrong. |
I seem to remember a great line from Bruce Springsteen, "all that heaven will allow". More money simply allows you to do more for everyone, including yourself. Spending money is always good for the economy. Behind every high end product is a store owner, a salesman, a stock person, a delivery person, an equipment manufacturer, the providers of raw material for the manufacturers, employees with family to support, and on and on. A high end purchase can be a very positive thing for many people. If it makes you feel guilty, maybe you might widen your perspective a bit? |
to Axomoxa, I should have added ... although well intentioned. Tubegroover, as I said earlier, we all bring our own biases into this issue. Maybe some rich people are status motivated, but so are many non rich people. In the case of my friend, he is the least pretentious person I know. Must someone always do what you think is "better" to gain approval? Unless you were in a position to have whatever you want, and do whatever you want it is very hard to be sure what you might do or think in that situation. Some of the best products in history are now considered works of art. Tiffany and Ferrari are two examples which come to mind. Also, at one time a "millionaire" was a big deal, now it is a "billionaire". To some, $75,000 is not that much money. It is a lot to me, but I would certainly spend that much or more on a home theater/audio system if I had the means. That would not make me one bit less of a "good" person, just a good person with a great stereo. |
It is always relative. Anyone who thinks any amount is "too much" is only putting their own bias into their opinion. I have one rich friend who has not one, but two "cost is no object" dream systems, (one for the city and one for the country). They sounds incredible. He also happens to be extremely big hearted and generous with his time and money toward many charities, so why should he deny himself the pleasure of the "best" sound reproduction? Axomoxa, you couldn't be more wrong. |
Thanks, KT.... Dan, I think you may have misunderstood me. In the 80's there was an extraordinary amount of money not being spent, but being held and manipulated by greedy manipulating, S.O.B.'s, can you say "Boesky"? I never saw people sleeping on the street until Reagan began implementing "trickle down economics", but I think it is fair to say that there is a tremendous amount of interdependance, and yes there is a "trickle down" factor, but I didn't intend that to be an economic guideline, just one of the many factors to consider when making judgements about what is "too much". I don't agree with the typical hate the rich attitude. You are who you are, rich, or not. I would not mind being rich, and I certainly would not mind buying Sony's top of the line video projector, a Camelot Roundtable DVD player, Avalon speakers, a great turntable, a Phillips 5 channel SACD player, Harmonic Technology Magic cables, and a beautiful house to put it all in. Would you? |
Cornfedboy, thanks for sending out a reality check here. I don't know about the Republican party aspect, but you made some good points IMO. Imagine for a second that you are a gifted designer/engineer/inventor. You have an idea that could potentially enhance lets say... multi channel playback, it takes $100,000 to fund your research and developement for 3 years. You are now able to produce the worlds next, "best" playback device. With investors you manufacture 3000 of these devices, costing $500 each to produce, totaling 1.5 million in hardware alone, not to mention paying 5 employees. You spend $30,000. to advertise, all the while praying your idea is accepted. Your total cost to produce and market this product is $4000 each. You have mortgaged your house and borrowed from friends to retain a controlling interest over this because you want to maintain design integrity and insure that you keep a fair share of the profit, should there be one. At your A/V dealer this product is displayed and demonstrated for the public, (costing the dealer some time and money). People check it out and find that they absolutely love the sound, and it would be a major improvement in your sound system, but it cost say... $14,000. That may seem "high' to some people, but you only get $6,500 at your wholesale price, giving you a $2,500 profit. You sell 1500 of them totaling $3,750,000. Minus your 2,000,000 investment gross profit is 1.5 mil. Split among investors you made $150,000. This enables you to afford to refine your copyrighted design and sell that to a major audio manufacturer for 2 mil. The public gets an even better playback device at a fraction of the original cost, say... $1,400. Change the numbers however you want, is the designer/inventor wrong for trying to build a better "mousetrap", and profiting from it? lets see, at first we had a $14,000 "over priced, self indulgent, conspicuously consumed" device, now the general public can get close to audio nirvana at 10% of the cost. Five years later, the same technology is available for $359 at Circuit city, and all the "less fortunate" people can now have some guiltless higher end fun. Why all the guilt tripping?. I have carefully spent around $15,000 over a 3 year period to come as close as I can to a $60,000 system. Would I have prefered to start out at that level?... Damn right I would. I would have been enjoying my system that much sooner, spending less time researching and negotiating, and more time listening to music. |
Nloyer, Good to hear from another New Yorker. See you at... Sound by Singer, Stereo Exchange, Audio-Video Salon, or maybe Harvey's? |
or maybe Park Ave Audio? BMPNYC, (Butler Music Productions NEW YORK CITY) |
It is beginning to sound like a sermon here, and not Audiogon. Axomoxa, it seems to me that you are still judging people by your own yardstick of limitations. My point is that it is possible to donate 100,000 to charity, assist friends and family, help little old ladies across the street, and still spend $100,000 on a sound system. You seem to think that the person buying such a sound system has only that much money, and splurged it all on a stereo. Your "too far" seems not very far to me. I bet it would not be too hard for you to imagine buying a beautiful Vac integrated amp with Synergistic Research cables, Avalon speakers, A Theta transport with DCS upsamplers, 100 favorite CD's and a nice Eames leather leather chair to listen in if you tried. I hope you win a million dollars in the lottery and get the chance to put your money where your mouth is. Good luck to you, either way. |
