Interesting analysis, Lohanimal. If, as you say, high end audio is becoming a cottage industry, would it be safe to say that it can be rescued and maintained by the remaining major brands that still hold audio to a higher standard?
I'm referring to brands like Luxman, Accuphase, Marantz, etc. that have the wherewithal to weather the economic storms and retain that look and feel that we associate with the high end, not to mention the niche players and local makes that seem to be doing just fine for the moment.
Reviewers of any sort aside, for the moment, these that I mention will be around for a long time to come. I believe the relevancy of reviewers is overstated and despite the debate, only provide a touchstone of sorts.
All the best,
Nonoise |
Mrtennis responded that if HiFi is in decline, then the product should be declining too. Not true I would say, because of the rise of small, specialist manufacturers. In the 19070's with a true mass market for HiFi, I suspect the one man and his dog outfits would have been crushed by the majors, Pioneer, Linn etc. Now these large companies have left the stage, so to speak. The little guy has come to the fore and I think we are as well or better served by manufacturers now as in the 70's. It's ironic, that as Vinyl and even more so, CD are becoming legacy formats, we are seeing such a range of fantastic and fantasticly expensive kit to play them on.
HiFi+, which is the only magazine I read, had it's 100th issue this month and the editor tried to speculate where the hobby/industry, would be at issue 200. The answer was, he had absolutely no idea, technology is moving that fast.
Courant's contribution was of great interest, but told us what most of us expected. Magazines run on advertising copy, not magazine sales, so are beholden to the manufacturers. I personally don't think most magazines would give 5 stars to a rubbish product, they would quietly send it back to the manufacturer and not do a review. There is sense to this too. Why spend 5 pages advising readers not to buy a product. The magazines are finding it just as tough as the manufacturers. I found out that HiFi News one of the biggest UK magazines, has a monthly circulation of about 8000 copies. I find that astonishing and just wonder how it can survive. |
One man and his dog is all good and well, but he has some difficulty serving the masses or relating what he makes to the buying public - hence he remains one man and his dog. Hi fi is in decline, yet music sales have increased year on year. The growth of streaming products, and things like the Devialet are good news IMHO - modern, stylish, versatile, and sounds brilliant. That said products like Magico and other uber expensive speakers are bad news - out of touch. Magazines and reviews that slap the back of such products every time they come out is also bad news - I was impressed with Fremer being one of the very few reviewers not to be bowled over by some Magico (Q5's) I think. Read an Alan Sircom review and he simply has nothing bad or negative to say. Hi fi needs to become genuinely affordable again, and reviewing must reflect that realiseable reality. |
OK then lets start out making a new hi fi movement altogether. Ther was a web site about it not long ago but lets try again affordable audio we will mainstream, we'll call pop music, main wave. We will congratulate those who make good stuff cheap. Maybe not the last top 5% we all chase which can be left alone, which can carry on in the fashion it has.
You know we are not the only people who care about older technology. I collect and use fountain pens and there are plenty of people who shell out $400-500 day in and day out for these pens. A perfectly usable fountain pen can be bought for about $1.50 and is thrown out like any old ball point. I am not suggesting that user of cheap pens gain an appreciation for slightly better ones but it may be as hard as getting people to appreciate mid fi. That stuff used to dominate. Ah the good old days Pioneer, Kenwood, Yamaha, Sansui, and better McIntosh, Accuphase even B and O, before that Fisher, Scott Bogen, Sherwood, Harmon Kardon etc.Oh well Where have they all gone...
I do have hope I noticed that people seem to want better headphones and are willing to pay for it. wWell see.. |
If you're writing for enthusiasts, then a) you better be enthusiastic, and b) you better create voyeauristic experiences with unattainable objects. Otherwise your audience will choose a different purveyor.
The audio press supports the illusion that there is a vector towards better and better that is moving far faster than actuality, which feeds the underlying consumerism that supports the industry, but after fifty years of variation on a theme it is far more likely that these are mostly just variations in subtle differences. There will be a next AR preamp, heralded with rave reviews of 'better' and calls to consume it, but it is unlikely to be better than all that have preceded it. |
Just found this thread. Not followed every post, however I concur with Mofimadness (2nd post) and Electroslacker post. If Hifi is in decline it is not for lack of great gear. Nor are the reviewers at fault. Who wants to spend time with and write about something that one is not interested in? Especially when there is so much worth writing about. My interest in audio is not in decline, I enjoy the mags, and am having more fun in this hobby than ever.
As an afterthought, think about how many TTs, phono stages, cartridges are available even after the rise of digital and how many approaches to digital exist. Is this indicative of a decline? |
The editors of the online blogs and the glossy mags need to up their integrity levels. What are we to make of an editor/reviewer who states that the latest DCS stack is the ultimate in digital playback, and a few months later says the latest Berkeley DAC is the new state of the art? The journalistic sources of information have devolved into glorified advertising services for the latest cool gadget. |
Psag, I think you are correct in what you say about the magazines. This may seem a daft comment, but does it matter that they are in thrall to the manufacturers? It only matters if you do'nt know this is the case. I suspect every seasoned "Audiophile" does, or should know that.
Who is at risk then? Well I suppose the newcomers. Those who have heard a great system and think they would like some of that. Well where do you start? For me in 1977, I started buying the magazines, in good faith. To be honest, I did'nt go wrong following their advice.
Now I use magazines as a, hopefully, interesting read, making me aware of new products I might want to research or audition |
I think some of these last few posts kind of hit the nail on the head. I was not saying the decline is due to the magazines alone, but if in '77 mags gave useful info, why is that not so much the case now. Bloggers really do lack a bit of integrity, but they don't have what I think is an industrial responsibility so to speak. When Hi-fi was more central to our home entertainment (ie we now have playstations, computers etc) there was more of the average persons budget dedicated to buying good and decent hifi. For instance the top end of turntables, although expensive as at the time Technics SP10 mk3 springs to mind, it is not vis a vis as expensive say as an SME 30. So where products are financially in the middle ground, there is a real competition to make the best product within that cost parameter. So we have more products competing within a sector and a need for reviewers to be more critical. Have read of a good car magazine - Autocar/Car/Top Gear - they are not scared to give a genuine opinion positive or negative - and the motor industry continues to thrive (yes I know it is a different industry dealing with 'essential items'). Currently we do have all out cost no object products - with a price to reflect this too. The problem with this is that whilst I love statement products, they do not occupy the real world, and worship within magazines of such products is seen as over-indulgent to the normal consumer. In car programmes, and I use top gear once again, they aren't scared t criticise such products. The average consumer need not have to read between the lines and get to know the writer first - I work with the spoken word all day as a lawyer, and I like precision (honest -lol). In the uk, apparently HiFi World have the highest ownership (of equipment) to reader ratio - it tends to contain a lot more realistic priced products - I must say I think the writing in that magazine has really gone south since it gives out 4-5 globes to just about everything. HiFi News are, unfortunately, just going backwards from the days of Colloms - hardly anything gets less than 75% score in sound tests. Same can be said of HiFi Choice which, if you pick up an edition 25 years ago, against something in the last 5 years, you will see that the old editions weren't scared to criticise a product. I went to the High End Show in Windsor and couldn't help but feel that it felt a bit like the last throes of a dying animal - there were some astonishingly tasty bits of kit that bore no relation to most of the buying public that were in attendance. When I went to my first show in 2002 (I think) I came away and set up auditions for several products, many of which I then purchased - I don't have an ultra high end rig but most peoples eyes water when I tell them the price of it. Even then the magazines were less critical than 10 years before, but are positively harsh to those out now. |
HIFI is not in decline. There exists a plethora of gear, more than any other age for our hobby. Possibly, purchasing this gear is in decline, this is directly related to the over-priced aspect of our hobby as well.
Every year, the "retail" prices incrase at least 10%, as manufacturers are covering their losses from the previous year. Everyone knows this...
Happy Listening. |
It is over-priced because the income disparities have become so so great the top few percent consider 50 K candy-bar money. |
I don't know why it is so expensive now. I suspect there are many reasons, reduced market share, marketing, prestige factor, etc. Some of it may be less true competition. Way back in the '70s there were many big separate companies making good products. That number has dwindled. Now there are many boutique companies making products without the engineering resources of the big boys. Once those boutique companies prove their product they are gobbled up, like ARC or Wadia. It is a completely different market now.
The other thing of interest is that HiFi news is giving out more good reviews now. Why? Is it possible the products are just better now than ever before? Take mid-fi products for example, a mid-fi reciever in the late '70s compares to a mid-fi receiver today are world's apart in performance and quality.
A sansui G8000 in 1979 retailed for $920. It was a 2 channel amp with 120W / channel, tuner included. That is about $3000 today. That would buy you the top of the line Pioneer Elite receiver. 140W/ch into 9 channels. 9.2 pre out, dolby atmos, streaming audio, video switching, etc... I would say that the new Pioneer probably sounds better too.
So how do you adjust the scales? Is there a set comparison point, or is it all relative, and relative to what? This hobby of ours has come a long way in the last 40-50 years, and it continues to improve. I expect it to continue. What was hi-fi 20 years ago is probably mid-fi performance now. |
The top audiophile components of today are clearly better than those of yesteryear, which is why favorable reviews abound. The problem is that too many reviewers refuse to look at a component in a critical fashion, which requires him/her to make an honest attempt to compare it with its competitors. Do we really need a reviewer to tell us that the latest megabuck Rockport or Magico is a really great speaker? |
