Why Don't More People Love Audio?

The audio industry has created a very toxic, noncredible environment with hyped, overpriced, gimicky equipment. The more high-end the audio store, the more pompous and arrogant the salesman...do audiophiles really like quality sound or knowing that there equipment is the newest and best? hmm...

Also convenience. Very few people are willing to put speakers out into the room. Most people don't want tuner / transport / dac / preamp / amp / speaker with all the wires and interconnects as well.
I see posts regularly for people wanting speakers that can be put against the wall. Or for an audiophile grade receiver only to be told it can't be done this way if you want hi-end sound. and it's true - too bad.
So maybe some active Tannoy, Mackie, or ATC monitors and a source with volume control would go a long way in solving the convenience issue while still having good sound.

HONESTLY if I knew it was like this, I wouldnt hoop in this hobby either. Too late now, worse than smoking! Nicotine = Soundstage, Tar = Tonal Body, Carbon Monoxide = Money (keep Exhaling ....)

The number one reason is lack of exposure. Even without all the ear-training, many high end systems are dynamite to listen to at first hearing, musical as can be and fabulous, fabulous imaging. But where in a normal lifetime does a non-cognoscente get to hear such things? Most people have no idea what can be done with sound.

LAck of awareness of audio, confusion, expense, snake oil, easier to stay out alltogether than get caught up in it all.

Tommy, you are not alone. There has been a lot of discussion here about critical listening vs. pure enjoyment of the music (btw, they are not necessarily separable). There's nothing wrong with appreciating the quality of your system and enjoying the music even more because it is well reproduced. Enjoy.

Most of my friends that come over think my system sounds great. But they can't or won't justify spending the 5k msrp i did. Even though i could make them very happy spending much less. Maybe someday one of my friends will catch on to this. But until then i'll just have to keep trying new stuff and reading about your setups. Also on my age 35 and under being dumded up. I agree, i used to listen to crap. Now i find myself buying more jazz. But i also listen to the system more than the music sometimes. Just a thought.

Hm, sounds like some of the stuff I wrote at various times. My credo: set a budget, buy the best sounding equipment you can within that budget and then sit down to some tunes. May I add another point: hope you win the lotto or come into an inheritance from an unlikely source. Good day.

There must be a thousand ways to approach this topic but I think you all would be best served to leave well enough alone. I remember the insurgence of yuppie money and ignorance in the Reagan years and I think that the ravages have yet to leave us. When I was in the Oriental rug business back then an elderly Afghani trader told me of a saying in his country: "Those who can afford it can't appreciate it and those who can appreciate it can't afford it". So it is with most things and twas always thus. Audio people are like most religious zealots in that they are quite disturbed by the fact that most people seem unwilling to adopt their beliefs. We pity them for what they are missing and dismiss their choice not to embrace our values as one of ignorance. They aren't interested and you should be glad.
During the years I sold audio in retail stores I maintained the same beliefs that many of you espouse here but the simple fact is many people just don't care. Some can make a distinction and some can't but no amount of education is going to be enough. Their focus is elsewhere. And that is good. Audio is populated by far to many buffoons at present,
as is well documented by the insipid, irrational, misspelled and unpunctuated reponses I inadvertently invite by posting any ad. A small community made strong by unity of vision and co-operation in purpose is a better goal. Suppose we do some weeding rather than blanket seeding. It's the money issue that seems most corruptive. Why don't we all relax and focus on what we have rather than what we might be missing?

Because what they hear/see for free sucks (radio and/or tv), in presentation and content.

They are fooled by some other 'trend'. Few of us are allowed to be fooled by the industry (that includes magazines such as Stereophile, that sole purpose is to fuel the addiction) that is profiting by selling us illusion.

..Was trying to remember the time before I ate the pill and finally heard the "audio matrix". I remember looking at classifieds for some good audio components and encountering strange brands that meant nothing to me for ridiculus prices. The thing that put me off the most was not knowing if these components were really worth these prices, and, if these prices represented the top of the line, if there was any reasonably priced gear of quality. Then I started listening. And I mean REALLY listening, cause actually I'm never really as blown away in an Audio Salon as I am at home, maybe because I'm not relaxing, etc. but it's just not the same. You just can't listen in the same way. I've noticed this with friends. If I sit them down to listen to my system, I can tell they're just not going to take the time / not comfortable enough to really get it. I believe that if I could bring my system over to their place, set it up and leave it for a month, they will understand. Today I'm admittedly cursed with audiophilia (It's the knowing that it can sound even better that gets you..), but have a healthy attitude that if I can afford a Mercedes, I can afford Mark Levinson, if I can afford $5k used car, I can afford $1k used Creek. (Or a $1,500 used Rogue Tempest, if the truth be known..) But it's still those moments when I'm sucked into an emotional performance in a way that could not have happened through Dr. Bose that makes me want to share the disease..

A few reasons:
1. Things like the $20,000 dollar IC's specially blessed by a "spherically correct" monk in China. On the 7th day of the 7th month etc etc.....

2. High End salesman.

3. Little green pens and CD's.

4. Tice clocks.

5. Shun-ANYTHING

6. The fact that most "audiophiles" are NEVER happy with thier sound. I mean, why would you want to get into something that you spent more time tweaking than listening??

People are generally not exposed to high end audio, there are so few high end salons. When and if they come across a high end audio salon, they are confused about the gear and really do not have any idea what they are looking for. Let alone, their ears are not educated to the finer details of audio listening. Sometimes they are attracted by the marketing appeal of a mainstream distributor or manufacturer, which may not necessarily sell a good product (for the sake of staying out of trouble, I will not mention any particular manufacturer or brand).

Many have not heard a good 2-channel system and have curiosity in multi-channel systems, caused by the recent mainstream hype stemmed from Home Theatre. When you think about it, people frequent movie theatres and they desire to duplicate that experience through Home Theatre.

It takes considerable effort, experience, and expense to develop a good high end hoem audio system. Many do not have the time to putforth that effort and as we all know, there are few shortcuts. When you finally get their attention, they must deal with WAF (Wife Acceptance factor).
Have you noticed that there are few women in this cottage high end audio industry? That is not the same in Home Theatre, if you don't believe me, just visit Circuit City's DVD department and see the many women shopping for DVD movies.

You have to love music - not audio. If you want your music to sound as good as possible, then you want the best reproduction equipment you can afford. If you don't really care about music - why would you care about the equipment?

Well guys, it's almost midnight and my South American 'amiga' is lying on the couch in the living room with the lights out just listening to a Simon and Garfunkel CD I left playing on my Swans speakers at a low volume level....she's been listening all night to music--and just loves it.

Just have to do things right.

Keis, I agree with both your points but especially your first. Many people who love music and go to live performances at every opportunity simply don't regularly listen to music at home. My wife and I play music all the time! Maybe it's a "chicken or egg" and people would listen more if their sound was better ... personally, I think that the majority of people simply don't want music as a priority in their lives. For those who do, only a portion will take the time to sift through the hype and audition great equipment.

Your last sentence is also a killer though: "You don't get girls (or guys) with Krell".

I think the original premise is wrong. Most people really don't like music. I leave in evidence just one observation. How may people do you invite to listen to music who actually sit and listen without wanting to talk about 30 seconds into the first band? For most Americans music is background soundtrack to their life and parties. Unfortunately some of the must talk crowd are audiophiles whating to praise or criticise the sound of the stereo.

On an independent issue...audio has very little positive feedback. Any friend or stray person off the street will glaze over when I tell them I own Krell or Sonic Frontiers or B&W or Thiel or Levinson etc etc. Now if I mention Aiwa or Sony or Toshiba now we are talking. So the pride of ownership has nothing to do with the previous discussions about Porshe etc. Everyone knows if you own Porshe you got good car taste and lots of money..Krell? You don't get girls with Krell.

I believe three reasons (at least):

1. Some people don't really love music (as much as they even think they might).

2. It does take a while to gain a critical ear.

3....and most important...I have many people who work for me in a demanding capacity with which some very talented people float to the top ("the cream") in many an attribute. Perhaps coincidence, but after some years of intimate dinner parties (I'm NOT rich by the way!) or holiday parties, ironically I find that the ones who are very talented also appreciate my system much more than others. (Yeah, yeah, yeah, they're not kiss asses either..)
So pat yourselves on the back! You are the chosen ones! (yes I jest, but I have in fact observed this phenomenon...)

Good points, KT. When I have fairly naive (aka Bose or boom box) listeners over, I usually play music through my HT system (Paradigm/Parasound) rather than my music system (JMLab Utopia/Belles/Rega). I do this for two reasons. First, the warmish, somewhat colored sound of the HT system is more inviting and friendly to the inexperienced listener whereas their initial experience of the music system may be that it is cool and analytical. Which it is, of course; that's why I chose it. Also, the price of the HT system seems much more do-able than the price of the music system which, while not very high by High End standards, seems totally absurd to beginners.

By all means play the music THEY like, not the music YOU like. Volunteer to go with them to shops, not just to help with the listening but to ease the interface with arrogant, know-it-all salespersons....

And for goodness sake, show them that this hobby is supposed to be FUN. I.e. keep them away from your audio-is-my-whole-life friends until they have built up some antibodies.

Will

I think that sometimes people are also intimidated by the good systems they hear / see. They recognize the quality of what they're listening to, but believe that to get much better sound that the boom box they have, they're going to fall prey to spending thousands more than they want to. I find myself constantly reassuring my friends who are kind of interested that they don't have to spend what I spent or become as fascinated by it as I have to get much better sound. I was out looking at big-screen TVs with one such friend and went into the speaker demo room. They had selectable CDs and speakers to choose from, so I put on Diana Krall's latest over some inexpensive speakers - it still blew him away, but it seemed achievable so I think it's more likely to stick. We moved down a couple rooms (up in price) and played the same song and he heard an even (much) better rendition, so I think he began to see that you don't have to spend a fortune, but that the more you spend, the better it gets. The key is to demonstrate that you can get a lot better sound for an amount of money that pales in comparison to what people spend on many other things, and that it can be simpler than the huge stacks many of us have built.

I find it amazing, too, how many people don't find music to be an important component in their life. Many were fanatics when they were young and have lost all zeal - I don't understand why. -Kirk

Will,
You hit the nail on the head. Audiophiles should do less overt projection of their sound systems and more subdued nuturing and education. My experience is to let my system do all the work. When my non-audiophile friends and family come over, I ask them to bring any new music they have purchased so I can experience their musical taste. This also broadens my musical exposure since I seldom listen to the radio. I'm a Jazz & Blues type of guy.

I don't talk about the cost or the time it took to get my system to its current state. What I do is ask them what exactly it is they like about the sound and then find out if they are interested in changing what they have. I ask their forcasted budget and then look for a good initial start-up system to match their current musical interest. A system that I could enjoy listening to when I visited them. Over the past 20+ years I have converted a couple of dozen Bose-slanted people to much better system (my % is about 80%).

Some of those people have gone on to the perverbial quest for "that perfect sound" and the others have been content with what I helped them purhase initially. One of my Uncles still has the Ohm F/Phase Linear 400/Conrad Johnson Pre/Denon TT & MMC we picked up many years ago and when I visit him it still sounds fantastic.

What I have learned to do is softly persuade those people who have asked for assistence towards the highend gear. Oh by the way, one of my nephews has surpassed me in the system he currently has. Oh to be young, single and wealthy.

Joekras, got to love'ya. Short, to the point. The undoing of this hobby lies in its very goal! As someone once put it, audiophiles upgrade their hardware until they can prove that all software is excrement. At least you have Tubular Bells. Maybe another thread could be started, something like: "How many recordings do you have that still remain enjoyable after your last upgrade". Whoever can honestly answer 0, should win the "Great Golden Ear Award" and retire to Arizona. Why so few people becoming audiophiles? Most people have lives to live and don't really enjoy obssessing over trivialities.

Because the more revealing the hardware the less enjoyable the software. Since I have become involved in this hobby, 90% of my CD's are unlistenable. So now I sit in the dark and listen to Tubular Bells. !@#$%

My personal feeling is.....there are not to many people loves audio( high end) because they were not expose to it.We kind of keep the good stuff within our community. If we look at the ads, it is only going in our own small world. Nobody did try to go out there and expose it and worst than that common people felt that going to a high end audio store is worst than going to a car dealer. We as audiophile needs to spread these hobby. Let us go out there and explain to our freinds that having a good equipments will really make the difference.
I know a guy that recently bought a lexus... He asked me if a Mark Levinson car stereo is better than the ones you can buy from the regular electronics store.I said to him. Go listen to it with me and I will let you know. Thanks.

I have a couple of friends who make absolute nuisances of themselves hinting and hemming and hawing for invitations to come over and listen to my good system. They wanna bring stacks of their own CDs (and wow does one of them have terrible taste) and sit for hours in rapt attention to Sousa marches and tribal music from Outer Barudisplatt.

Now, both these guys have beaucoup bucks--helluva lot more than I do--yet they won't spend a dime on their own systems. One has little more than a Technics boombox while the other has some ancient electronics and a pair of Advent "bookshelf" speakers with the grill cloth literally rotting away from the frames.

Both these guys have healthy personalities and reasonably good ears. Neither is cheap. I think they are just daunted by snotty salesmen, incomprehensible jargon, and the challenge of struggling for that synergy we all keep talking about.

I think it would help a lot if we would try harder to introduce people to our hobby in ways that seem to them realistic. Help them to start with some just-above-entry-level gear and grow into the hobby, as most of us did.

Telling a newbie to budget as much for cables and ICs as for components is an utterly absurd thing to do. We wouldn't have believed it at that point in our own lives and many of our most golden-eared colleagues don't believe it now. Condescendingly referring to $3K speakers or $2K amplifiers as "mid-fi" doesn't help matters, either. One afile friend of mine told an enthusiastic newbie that if he didn't have ten grand to spend right off the bat he should just forget it and stick to his boombox.

That, brethren and sistren, is a big chunk of (1) why high end remains a niche market and (2) why people think we're nuts.

Have fun anyway.

Will

Because most people don't have the time to listen. From those who have, a bunch just don't get it (do you have to play it so loud? I have neighbours walk up to my door in broad daylight cmplaining, one telling my wife to turn down the system, they like Céline Dion on a ghetto blaster by the pool... the other telling me to lower the volume, he firmly belives, bless his religious heart, that the blues is the "Devil's music"... maybe I should move). This leaves another bunch who have the time but not the money (I think there's a song in there somewhere...)and then you get to those who really believe, like I do, that the whole thing really is an ends vs. means mixup. Focus on the music, get your system to a certain level of accuracy, competence then forget it and concentrate on buying recordings, reading about music, reading about recorded music and above all else listening to music, preferably live.

We're guilty of projection. Most of us are into gear as a means to the end of hearing moving, exhilirating music, on demand, in our homes (I actually believe this). We also tend to think that others want, or would want, the same experience. But they don't. Like one of the earlier posts, my wife knows good sound because we have it in our home, but she almost never goes to the big rig in the dedicated room. I have had many friends sit in my dedicated room and I have played music chosen by them on my $20k+ system. They say "WOW," sometimes genuinely amazed at the realism, power, intimacy, and immediacy of a good system, but none of them has changed their priorities to invest even a quarter of that amount in their own systems, even though they could. Music over my stereo is an ecstatic experience that gives me goose bumps and brings an occasional tear to my eye. I would never give it up! My conclusion about others, though, regretably, is that very few of them have ever been moved by music the way most audiophiles are on a regular basis, no matter how good the system. That's the main reason most people don't pursue hi-end audio, even inexpensive hi-end, which can be quite good; they just don't care that much about music. This is not elitist, it's just the way it is. The quality of their systems reflects the priority of music in their lives. High equipment prices and snobby dealers sure don't help, but they're not the main limiter of the appeal of hi-end audio. When I reluctantly came to this conclusion it saddened me, but now I don't worry about it, and instead focus on my own experience of music.

I'm a recent convert to the high end. I think my conversion began the day I listened to and purchased a pair of Sennheiser HD600 headphones. For a few hundred dollars I owned audio gear that could be considered among the best in its class and far outperformed the speaker systems I'd heard in BestBuy and the like.

That purchase led me to websites like this one, where I learned about the many choices, cliques and nuances of audio gear. Granted, I am playing on a smaller scale, but I've just ordered my first SS headphone amp, and am looking into interconnects and powercables. In the future I'd like to experiment with an OTL headphone amp, and in my research I've become more interested in tubes.

Recently, I've seen Sennheiser advertisements in men's magazines. Perhaps readers will become interested and follow a path similar to the one I've found.

Because you don't need anything better than a ghetto blaster for the crap which is playin out there. MP 3 is a good example. Listen to an MP3 file over a high end system and you know what I mean.
Good music - as an art - is elite stuff....so is high end gear.
Aida_w

Because they just don't realize just how good it is!!! Lack of exposer.

I think the ultra high end does market itself pretty well and attracts buyers into the yuppie market place. Fortunately, like us music lovers / audiophiles, even yuppies can hear the bad sound made by many of the exclusive products. Even if they can't hear it when they are told that cables and interconnect should cost about as much as a component the run for the door. People with lots of money aren't freekin stupid - the exclusive high end for stupid wannabees.

Clearly there must be many in this category - during a recent visit to the one local audio shop worth visiting, they told me they had pre-sold about 10 of the upcoming Krell DVD players at $9K retail. They reiterated several times that they can't the new HTS2 fast enough to meet demand. They told me they were negotiating to sell their floor model Dynaudio Evidence's ($85K/pair) to a guy who is in the process of building a new listening room that measures 45x70 feet! Then he pointed out that this same guy was lending, since the room isn't ready yet, his Krell KPS-25sc and his $25K/pair speaker cables to the shop. He went on to say that the guy was thinking about doing HT by adding another pair of Evidences. Somewhere in that sequence I'm thinking, "this has nothing to do with loving music and everything to do with status"

My overriding impression of going into almost every high-end shop in my area is that it's this category that keeps them going, and several of them are doing VERY well. Anecdotally, it seems that the shops that are small and built a business by growing an evolving client base are getting hammered by the internet, etc., but that the places that move a lot of boxes to people who want something good and modern without the hassle of learning about high-end audio (or video for that matter) are doing very well. -Kirk

There is the category of a rich guys that come to audio dealer and build the home theater in overall price of $35000 or more never knowing anything about high-end audio -- just simply by believing that it's good and modern...

They do; they just can't afford it.

Because too many audiophiles listen to their equipment not their music. We turn people off by the way they see us listen to things. I've seen people with huge dollar systems listen to "music" they don't like because it sounds good. Where is the love of music in that???

hi audio-unlimited. ah, if only what ewe are saying were true! ;~) reality is that the usa is *not* other parts of the world. to take yer automotive reference - in the usa nascar is king, not formula one. even tho folks know what a ferrari is, most americans will be more impressed w/a '57 chebbie.

i too, have many friends who have heard my rig. and, for the most part, very few are even remotely interested in investing in even a modestly-priced rig - cuz they don't need anything more than a cheap rack system for background music. most folks yust aren't into listening to music for its own sake. and these folks are *far* from yer typical stereotyped bud-drinkin' nascar-lovin' fan. ;~) i know three people who are now interested in decent audio equipment since being exposed to my rig - that's it. and only two of 'em have done anyting about it. actually, it's only one of 'em that's done anyting about it - the second has yust benefitted from the leftovers of the 1st, cuz the 1st went so overboard! :>)

regards, doug s.

I feel that there are a lot of people who can afford excellent audio systems and would be very interested in them if they knew that they existed. The people in this country on the whole have little if any exposure to great audio compared with other countries that I have existed. In some parts of the world a great system is as much a status symbol as an exotic car is here(this is in response to the threads asking why people by Ferraris but not exotic audio....because they know that Ferraris exist!). I am sure that if there was a larger exposure true high-end audio be it an the form of $2K systems or $200K systems and a quick explanation of such things as staging and imaging, more people would buy into the hobby. I have had plenty of friends come over and listen to my reference rig that had not heard a real system before, most of them leave thinking that I am not the crazy person that they thought I was and as for tips on putting together a reasonable system. This hobby isn't just for us rapid electronic nuts but anyone that can enjoy music and appriciate better playback quality.

I think that most people are not experienced listeners.Whatever system they have is good enough for them.The high quality listening experience forces one to do two things,sit still for a time and appreciate what you are hearing, and spending more money than you may want to.
For me,high end listening is another way to "smell the roses".
johnny7

I agree that MOST music out there is pure pap with no worthwile musical content - but, anyone eager for creative inspired music can find it in abundance, and in many genres-you just have to look for it. If you can get CBC FM radio from Canada you will find an unlimited resource of well selected music with no prejudice - except that commercial music is ALL filtered out. check out cbc.ca and all of its radioshow playlists with ratings and recommendations that will keep you busy for a long, long time.

There is one notable exception to the rule that audio gear is not status-related enough to attract the interest of non-audiophiles. B&O. Some people absolutely covet the stuff and I am sure none of them have ever heard a truly good Hi-Fi system. Or is it that most B&O showrooms don't have proper listening room to expose its flaws? A wise choice on B&O's part - because the stuff sounds incredibly mediocre for the price.

People used to being hyper-stimulated don't like to sit in front of a stereo and just listen to music. I've had the same experience others have described- friends come over and listen to two songs on my system and say "Wow, I've never heard music like that" as they get up and walk away! I've never had anybody pulled into the experience and want to play more music.

Sedond is right, people "want to watch" because it (HT) adds another sense (to be stimulated) to the mix. This is what I meant further up the board when I said in today's social environment, listening to music (and nothing else) seems almost quaint. We've seen it even in pro sports. The drama of the competition alone isn't enough anymore, look at the Olympic coverage. Baseball and even football has to be boosted with all sorts of other bells and whistles- fireworks, Diamond Vision, cheerleaders/dancers, prizes/contests. And while the XFL may not make it, I can assure you the "model" will be copied and perfected. The execution was the problem, not the premise.

Frankly, in this environment, I'm surprised high end has as many product choices available as it does. But the original question was why is HE relegated to cottage industry status? My answer would be that it is dominated by individuals that are passionate about their business. This small group of talented people are the antithesis of the large corporation. They are making decisions because it's the right thing to do, or to pursue a personal objective etc., cost be damned.

These companies go out of business frequently as a result too. But if they are successful, inevitably the passion of the founder can never be matched or shared as a company grows. So if it prospers, it will eventually get to the size where the inevitable buisness trade-offs start shaping the decions ("Wouldn't we make more profit if we came out with a mid-fi line and doubled our sales potential?" or "Shoudln't we aim closer to the middle of the segment?". I've personally sat in hundreds of these meetings. The bigger the company, the more generic the products become because you can't be a big niche company. The product development costs are prohibitive. So big companies must always aim for a broad market segment. Smart ones still find a way to differentiate their products, but they will never be thrive living off just HE profits.

So high end will always remain a cottage industry and banruptcy and mergers will be common; not only because of the small market, but because of the nature of the people and the type of company required to create it.

Meta, the reason that people don't ask where they can get one is because they are being polite. After you tell them how much you paid, most of them are thinking that you are absolutely bonkers.

Also, Levinson is one of the few who is at least taking a stab at "thinking outside the box." In addition to Red Rose, Lexus now has Levinson audio systems in them. I haven't heard one, but maybe he'll be able to cross-sell home gear to Lexus owners; it will at least elevate awareness of the brand name. Like you, I'm not certain which way it will go, but at least they are trying something different.

As has been noted by many before, this is in marked contrast to the high-end establishment that superstitiously demonizes and avoids anything new or different (digital, HT, etc.).

kthomas sez:

"HT as a phenomena exists because of the classic marketing of creating a solution to a problem that didn't necessarily exist. Show people something cool, and sell them on how there life would be better if they owned one, and they'll want one / buy one. It's all been done very successfully.">>>
+++++++++++++
i must humbly beg to disagree. 12 years ago, when i lived yust south of hartford, ct, i couldn't figure out why, w/the exception of new haven, ct was such a dead place socially - especially hartford. then, one friday evening, around dinner-time, a neighbor asked me to drop off a video at a store near where i was going grocery shopping. well, i'm not into video now, certainly wasn't then. this was my 1st time in a place like this. ya couldn't get *near* the place - it was *packed*! in a nutshell, i figured it out. america loves movies, america loves to watch 'em at home even more than at the theatre. the marketing here is a no-brainer - get the sound in the home as good - or better - than that at the movies. most folks *will* go over to someone else's house to sit in front of a h-t set-up & watch a movie. not so w/audio. most folks couldn't give a rat's ass about listening to music, unless it's background, or they're alreddy occupied in some other manner - which is why car-stereo is so popular - yure stuck in the car, may as well pass the time listening to toons (instead of paying attention to driving?). i *rarely* listen to anything when driving, other than the engine. my daily-driver (90 mile commute) doesn't even have a radio in it. but, i'm in the minority - i like to sit in front of the stereo & listen to toons, i like to drive when i'm in the car, & i don't like to watch movies, at home or in the theatre.

as far as the hi-end goes, i don't really believe there were more folks interested in it 30 years ago as there are today - it's a lunatic-fringe kinda ting, always has been, always will be.

yust my opinion, of course! ;~) doug s.

I have to disagree on your last statement. Almost nobody that listens to my system has ANY clue as to how much time and money it took to get it to sound as good as it does (IMHO). Although they almost all ask how much it costs, very few ask me where they could buy a similar system even if I don't tell them how much it costs. Mark Levinson's new gig (Red Rose) offers all in one packaged solutions. I doubt he will sell significantly more than other HE dealers selling the stuff under his name.

I do agree however with your and others assertions that the current cultural bias against listening as an end is what holds HE back.

I was going to say 1 in a 1000 but thought it might sound overly emphatic, despite the fact that it seems about right. It's probably slightly higher than that if you include the people I've drug in to one.

I'm not suggesting a need to pander, and certainly not suggesting a desire to court the LCD. What I'm suggesting is that to get more people to love quality audio reproduction is going to take a different approach than that which is currently offered by those who love it the most. I think a vast number of people, plopped down in front of an excellent system, can hear and, at least intellectually, appreciate the quality of the sound reproduction. But the time and $$ required to acquire it for themselves, and the education that leads to a set of reasoning that would justify such a purchase in their mind are all obstacles. Just take time for instance - very few people have the patience to sit and listen to even a couple of songs if that's all they're doing. I'm speaking from the experience of showing off my system to friends - no later than 1/2 way through the second song, they're talking, standing up, moving around.

So, if the question of "Why don't more people love audio" is meant to mean, "Why don't more people want good-quality, audio reproduction to pursue as a goal in and of itself, along with listening as a pursuit of it's own", then I think the answers about short attention span, changing culture, etc. work pretty well. But if the question is actually intended to say, "Why are people satisfied with Bose when they could have so much better for the same price or just a reasonable amount more," then I think it's because the obstacles of places to experience it and educate oneself, the lack of high-end innovation to accomodate this market segments "needs" (ie, not having the right products), and the distance the current high-end holds itself from this potential market are the reasons.

Those of us interested in high-end do say "Whoa!!!! Cool!" on a regular basis. However, for the most part, the things that make us say this are not appreciated by the common audio consumer, e.g. soundstaging, accuracy, "you are there" reproduction.

Should we once again pander to the least common denominator? The average joe is almost always impressed by Bose's sizzle and boom. Should that be the sound for which struggling high-end manufacturers ought to be reaching? Many of us already have better sound quality than 99% of people have heard and yet the biggest question I get from non-knowing visitors is "How loud does it go?" If the HE manufacturers innovate to give even more realistic sound, will anyone other than us care?

Kthomas, you must live in an enlightened community because I would venture the number to be about 1 in 1000 that have been in a HE store.

Docwarnock, I agree - HT as a phenomena exists because of the classic marketing of creating a solution to a problem that didn't necessarily exist. Show people something cool, and sell them on how there life would be better if they owned one, and they'll want one / buy one. It's all been done very successfully.

To give you my answer to your question in your final paragraph, I think the lack of innovation in the high-end is based on a failure by the high-end in general to recreate (redefine) itself. Read any book on successful companies in today's economy, and they'll stress the need to be constantly recreating yourself, constantly making obsolete old concepts / products and creating the new. Recognize the next "wave", that time when things have undoubtedly and irrevocably changed and that you need to change or die (or, in this case, become extremely niche). The changes are there, and have been occurring for at least a decade, in how home electronics are used for entertainment, how music and movies are "consumed", but the high-end still has many of the same mantras and, in general, rejects most of the new.

Mind you, I have no problem with the high-end staying true to the course - I just am not surprised that fewer people are signing on, and that high-end manufacturers are experiencing lack of growth or worse. I think you're exactly right - innovate in a way that gets people to say "Whoa!!!! Cool!" and they'd decide they had to have one. Better yet, put it on display where a large number of people might actually see it / hear it, and you might really attract people (Out of every 100 people I know, I'd venture that fewer than five have even been in a high-end audio store). In other words, put quality audio sound in products that more people might experience and desire, and there's a great likelihood that people would come to appreciate it more.

There's no question the electronics industry is always looking for the next big thing. And when they find it, all the manufacturers seem to move in lock-step to saturate the segment with product as they push their mature product lines to the back burner. And we all know that high end audio equipment has reached the flat part of the curve where the law of diminishing returns starts to limit the size of the next incremental improvement. Still, having said that, the fact remains that audio today delivers a level of performance we only dreamed about 20 years ago. So if all else were equal, it should be enjoying an upsurge of interest due to the high level of performance and value that it now offers. Afterall, greater numbers of us listened to inferior equipment 20 years ago; yet interest in high end declines when in fact, the opposite should be true.

So getting back to the spirit of the original question, what has changed? Well the short answer is "we have." Getting back to my previous post, new products only take-off when there is a convergence of new technology with a receptive public. That receptivity is most dramatic when a product taps into the prevailing mindset of consumers. We all know of the stories of good technologies that failed to find a market because they were out of synch with the mood of market in one way or another. So while the manufacturers can offer a supply side push with an array of new products, they end up pushing on a rope if it isn't striking a resonating chord with the customer.

In the 60's, Marshall McCluhan wrote "The medium is the message." I would update that in 2001 by saying "the technology is the message." Getting back to my post of yesterday, the receptive chord that has been struck with today's consumer is the technology of home theatre delivering the desired heightened experience. The experience becomes more important than the programing, and as a result, the technology (or equipment) becomes the "message."

A previous poster raised the valid point that pop culture has always been banal, and the mass market will always be bigger, which is true. I was reminded of this watching Ken Burn's Jazz that Ella Fitzgerald's first big hit was "A Tisket A Tasket"- not much better than the Spice Girls when you get right down to it. But I think one thing that is different now in various aspects of society is the switch in influence from a "top down" to "bottom up" paradigm.

This really started in the 60's. Prior to that trends in fashion or most anything else filtered down from the top- rich people, jet setters etc. But since the 60's the dominante influences in society have been "bottom up." Now you could say, "Well wasn't jazz the classic bottom up influence?" And I would say absolutely it was, but they were all wearing suits and ties while they were playing it- just like the upperclass people they were playing for. When the Beatles quit wearing their short jacketed suits in 1964 that was about the last vestige of any pop culture personalities still influenced by the top down paradigm. And not insignificantly, they then proceeded to blow it into oblivion.

So what's the point of all this? In the bottom-up paradigm we now live in, the influence of the banal pop culture is greater than ever before. When combined with greater disposable income than every before it is little wonder that the taste of the common man now dominates the Board Room when product decisions are being made. So it's not our imagination that there has been a lowering of the bar in a lot of areas, music and audio being on top of the list of casualties. The "mass market" no longer aspires to the same things as the high end market in many areas, and audio is the classic example.

Uh-oh, I see a chicken versus the egg argument starting. Nonetheless, I don't think that demand for HT caused the innovation in that segment of the market, but the other way around. People saw and heard the new boom and sizzle setups and said "eh-eh, eh-eh, eh-eh, that rocks!" (Sorry for the gratuitous Beavis and Butthead reference).

I remember reading an interview with Bob Stemple, then CEO of General Motors, in the late 1980's. He said problem was stupid Japanese consumers wouldn't buy GM vehicles because the steering wheel was on the wrong side, and poor GM couldn't put them in the right place because of the low volume. Apparently the braintrust at GM didn't/still doesn't understand the difference between cause and effect. The problem is that GM made cars that didn't meet Japanese consumers' needs (steering wheel in correct place), thus they would never/never will achieve any volume in Japan. What a vicious cycle.

But isn't this what we face in the high-end? Can't innovate because there isn't enough demand/market is too narrow. Or is demand low (and falling) precisely because the manufacturers don't innovate? And if they did, wouldn't people say "eh-eh, eh-eh, eh-eh, that sounds cool ... gotta have one"?