Kthomas, I agree. Pecentage I quoted is far too much. |
I agree that exposure would have a positive effect on participation in enjoying high-end audio, but I think the estimate that at least 1/2 would convert upon hearing a very well set-up system is much too high, especially if your definition of "audiophile" is at all demanding. Certainly far fewer than 1/2 of the people that audition my system convert (or even sit through very many songs) - in fact the only person I've ever had get real interested was somebody who's already on the path. Maybe my system doesn't meet the criteria of exposure being discussed here, but I'd bet that it does, but in any case it's a pretty common theme that non-audiophiles who hear a nice system, even when they acknowledge awesome sound, don't show much interest in actually owning one. That said, I've always agreed that exposure would do a lot to promote the higher-end industry. Put decent systems into CD stores with a sign saying "Displayed by .....". Repetitive exposure would quite possibly work a lot better than an individual session. |
Et's opinion has lot more truth in it. People (haves or have nots) have not listened to what could be possible with great system. If they listened to a very well set-up system,at least half of non-audiophiles will convert. Take me as another example: Just 11 years ago, I thought YAMAHA components and Cerwin-Vega was above the masses! And even then I paid somewhere around 7K for everything. If I knew then I would have put together pretty good system at that price! |
I think all the responses are good but here is my take on this. "Exposure, exposure ". There was a time when I thought the little paper woofers in Bose speakers sounded pretty decent and I really wanted a Bose "system". Then I listened to Sony receivers, and thought these were the very best. Well, you guessed, pretty soon I explored this whole sound affair and now I am a hard core tube diehard. Yes I want tubes in my tuner ( M.D. if you please ). The problem is, my tastes now are way above my means - - easily $100,000. wish list. What's a poor guy to do with a simple $40,000 system ?? Music stirs the soul, it has passion. Rolexes do not, Ferrari's ... maybe, if there is a pretty blond in the passenger seat, then maybe, just maybe. I have friends with almost $1M homes and they listen to Pioneer receivers with cheap JBL speakers. Who buys Mark Levinson Transports and DACs to go with their Lamm SET's ? Not me. |
Followup: Why lack of interest in hifi I do think there has also been a shift in taste away from high fidelity. People have been trained to want BAD, electronic sound. By this I mean, that much of the high end is about correctly reproducing acoustic instruments in a real space and being true to real sounds even in pop recordings. However, people are starting to complain that live music isn't as exciting as their stereo, hence the pressure for bright concert halls in classical music. I am also astonished at how often jazz is over amplified in tiny clubs where no mikes are needed. And look at musical theatre. Last time I was in London I was stunned at how often the music was broadcast at ungodly levels over a poor PA system. I talked to a local engineer who claimed that people want that loud ARTIFICIAL electronic sound. Let's forget most rock concerts, where noise and bright lights beat good sound any day. So some of it is lack of exposure. Some of it is lack of status. Some is lack of passion. But also, just face it -- relative to the general population we audiophiles suffer from a disease :) :) |
Actually audio has real snob appeal in many countries in the Far East. Some buyers of expensive stuff love music, others want status. There is no status to hifi in the West. Why, I don't entirely understand. True story: when we first started selling Clayton amps, one guy from Hong Kong came to our setup at HiFi 96, loved the sound, thought about buying our stuff and then was put out to find that our amps sold for under $10K. He said he would lose face and went on to buy a MUCH more expensive set from another long-established company. Of course, the economic crash in the Far East since 1997 has destroyed much of this business and destroyed lots of high end companies along the way. But clearly, advertising would help. It also wouldn't hurt if some big rags hadn't always claimed that all equipment sounds the same. Just my 3 cents worth. |
High end audio will never appeal to the average yuppie. It is too sophisticated, it takes a committment, and you can't show it off because nobody understands it. But thank God for that; BMW, amoung other enthusiast brands was ruined by the masses. I would rather keep it to myself, even if anyone was interested. |
I've always been a big live music fan, but don't have time to go out as much. I know for a fact that i have a high end stereo so I can hear music better. In many ways I prefer it to concerts because I can keep the volume level reasonable, and the fidelity is actually quite a bit higher. I look forward to listening to music when the day is done. |
And then there's some additional questions: (3) do we want audiophile equipment to be a status symbol and (4) why would that be beneficial. As far as (3) goes, that's relating back to basic human needs for validation. We've spent gobs of money our equipment. It would be nice to get knowing nods of appreciation instead of puzzled looks. As far a (4) goes, I don't think it would economically beneficial. Look what happened to the price of 4 wheel drive vehicles once having an SUV became a status symbol. It drove the price of practical SUVs (e.g., Chevy Blazer) up to luxury status, and created a class of luxury SUVs with astronomical prices. Those of us who live out in the boonies in snow country don't appreciate that. Audiophile equipment is expensive enough already! |
There's sort of two questions here: (1) why isn't high end audio a status symbol and (2) why don't more people love high end audio. With regards to (1), a lot has to do with the perceived technical nature of the audiophile hobby, which implicit means work, not recreation, making it inconsistent with the notion of conspicuous consumption of luxury items. Lack of lifestyle advertising promoting audiphile equipment as status also contributes to this. Note that Bose is successful in part because it does advertise in non audio-oriented magazines, appealing to the luxury of tiny speakers and simple one-box systems. Relative to (2), I don't have a well formed idea. When I first heard a true high end system, the music moved me so that I immediately HAD to have one also, and two weeks later purchased my first set of audiophile grade speakers and the rest is history. My wife and I now enjoy a system that sends shivers up my spine and can move her to tears. Recently I demoed the system to someone who is a wine connoisseur. Being passionate about the nuances of wine, surely he would appreciate refinement in audio, I thought... instead after listening for 30 seconds, he shrugged and said, "gee, I guess one of my speakers at home isn't working", and that was the end of that. |
Is it that 2 channel is perceived as yesterday's news?? I know a couple of people who are doing well and they all have dedicated home theaters. Is it that you can finance a great deal of HT equipment into a home loan with out a problem?? I have never heard of anyone financing 2 CH audio into a 1st home mortgage, where builders have lists of people to do custom HT design and install at $120/hr and up in new construction. Some people just do not care about spending alot of $$ on a stereo.... Some of these people have the ears that can hear the differences... One of my good friends is a "gear-head", has a 7 car garage with heat and AC for his toys, a Snap-on tool set to kill for... and exotic cars to fill the garage (he knows how to drive (white knuckles and all) and repair them all). He comes over to evaluate the frequent changes I make to my Hi-End gear, and can explain the changes as well as anyone, but has a HT budget of 5K including the Big Screen.... Not every one cares about the best sound... I think 2CH is like art... I love art, but I care about my stereo more... I would spend 20K on a pair of speakers before I would on art to decorate... Others I know have spent 20K on art, and have the wave radio for sound. You don't see art advertised on TV, nor the High End 2CH audio. |
There's sort of two questions here: (1) why isn't high end audio a status symbol and (2) why don't more people love high end audio. With regards to (1), a lot has to do with the perceived technical nature of the audiophile hobby, which implicit means work, not recreation, making it inconsistent with the notion of conspicuous consumption of luxury items. Lack of lifestyle advertising promoting audiphile equipment as status also contributes to this. Note that Bose is successful in part because it does advertise in non audio-oriented magazines, appealing to the luxury of tiny speakers and simple one-box systems. Relative to (2), I don't have a well formed idea. When I first heard a true high end system, the music moved me so that I immediately HAD to have one also, and two weeks later purchased my first set of audiophile grade speakers and the rest is history. My wife and I now enjoy a system that sends shivers up my spine and can move her to tears. Recently I demoed the system to someone who is a wine connoisseur. Being passionate about the nuances of wine, surely he would appreciate refinement in audio, I thought... instead after listening for 30 seconds, he shrugged and said, "gee, I guess one of my speakers at home isn't working", and that was the end of that. |
Great topic! This article contrasts a previous article that I wrote "Do audiophiles ever listen to the music". Some people just don't seem to care about the quality of sound, my friends included. If a cd is playing and it can be heard, it is good enough for most people. I honestly think that the people who have money are ignorant to high end stereo. They simply do not know that it exists. They go to sears and stroll by the audio dept and they ask the salesman "whats the best stereo you sell?" This is what keeps Dr. Bose in business. They can buy their new mercedes or BMW, because they know about them through advertisements. You don't find any adds on t.v for Wilson audio, Conrad Johnson or Quicksilver. If high end audio was advertised, I think these people would be interested, or at least curious about the high end hype that we seem to have a passion for. I do agree that it does take a lot of time and effort to put together a great system. If they don't have it and don't care about assembling a good system,then I guess I just lost time and money responding to this thread. |
The original question was why don't people who buy expensive things also buy expensive audio gear, not why are those people not audiophiles. I think the fact that they're not audiophiles or music lovers (or both) is adequately explained by the amount of time these pursuits take. Just like any hobby well done, it's time consuming and most people with a fair amount of money don't have time for too many well done hobbies. I think the reason these people don't buy high-end / expensive audio systems is that the main impetus for owning other high-end things without being avidly into the hobby is status, and there isn't much status to be had by owning a high-end audio system. How many non-audiophiles have you ever really impressed with your system? Not just, "Wow, that sounds great" but a reaction that shows you really got their interest for even, say, 15 minutes. I think this is one of the reasons HT is so much more popular - it is easy to truly grab somebody's attention with even a halfway decent HT setup, even if they're not into it themselves. Super Bowl at my house on the new big screen and surround sound! A HT setup does have a fair amount of status associated with it, a high-end audio system just doesn't. |
I am confused. I think Porsches and Ferraris lend themselves to passion and expertise and yet they are purchased as status symbols by idiots who probably never learn to drive them. How many Nikon camera owners know their way around a darkroom? How many Rolex Sea Dweller wearers ever swim beneath 3 feet? So why doesn't anyone care about high end audio? |
I think the difference is that being an audiophile is a very pasionate and creative hobby. I think the things you mentioned are related to status and image. Not that they dont share some characterstics but one is a lot more indepth then the other. |
These are the same people who keep Dr. Bose rich and famous.Or, are looking to score Sound Lab-in walls 'cause speaker wire on the floors is a taboo. I am responding, but I don't usually give much thought to the subject.The thought of going to Wall-Mart for discount Vandy 5's would be more than I could handle. Does K-Mart carry Cardas? Yes, I'm keeping the day job, but this is how it would be if everybody were like us. |
Most people are able to love and appreciate music without obsessive concerns about sonic quality. It's not because they are ignorant or uncaring. It's well known that any number of professional musicians (classical & pop) do not have audiophile type systems, yet I don't think that anyone can seriously question their commitment to music. Audiophiles are a small minority who by definition obsess about sound quality. Most other people are able to simply enjoy the music. BTW, I'm both a music lover and an audiophile. |
Primarily because audio takes a fair amount of time and effort, and while money can buy lots of things, time is not for sale. It takes a fair amount of time to assemble a decent rig, collect a wide variety of music to enjoy, and more importantly the time to enjoy it. All of the accumulated "stuff" you listed is easy; buy and let it sit around or use it every now and then, perhaps pay someone to look after it, no real effort expended on their part. These people have things, but no real interests or passion in their lives. |
