Are audiophile products designed to initially impress then fatigue to make you upgrade?


If not why are many hardly using the systems they assembled, why are so many upgrading fairly new gear that’s fully working? Seems to me many are designed to impress reviewers, show-goers, short-term listeners, and on the sales floor but once in a home system, in the long run, they fatigue users fail to engage and make you feel something is missing so back you go with piles of cash.

128x128johnk

@steakster Talk about a cynical response. 

I'm truly not sure where you're coming from there. My impression is that he's not getting what he's after with his system.

It's interesting how this hobby we've all chosen tends to tie other aspects of our lives together ... or maybe it would be fair to say that it can reflect other things we've learned about life? I don't really know how to say it.

I'm sure a lot of you know people who seem to never be content with the things they've either acquired or achieved. Being content with what we have in life is the one that applies here. But I guess that's the way money works in general, right? It will definitely not make you happy ... and for the of you that think it does I personally feel sorry for you. And if you're not already happy by the time you get it, or don't know how to make yourself happy, that is ... the money is (insert the words: your system) will either make you a bigger j**k off than you were before you got it ... or it's gonna allow you to be able to enjoy your life more. 

 

Love how some audiophiles feel insulted by a discussion in an audio forum he feels all lumped in poor old sod. it's all about him. Not about voicing planned obsolesce or manufacturers trying to get attention on a filled sales floor no it's all about him feeling lumped.

Is that what we blame it on. (Fatigued). That is why I have about 6 to 10 different sets of audio systems. I do not have deep pockets but in 25 years or more I was able to aquire my share of equipment.  Every system I own it has its own distinctive sound performance.  Will I ever buy a new power amplifier or preamp  I wouldn't say never but the last 4 years I spent my money of custom subs for some of my systems.  Trying to tweak by adding a single 18 inch sub to one system and a isobaric dual 18 inch subs to another system. My speakers hf drivers consist of paper cone- titanium dome- amt and berellium drivers. As far as the manufacturers and stereo salesman they will never stop making or selling audio equipment. 

@johnk 

Don't you have enough conspiracy theories in your life, that you need to invent more.

What kind of business plan includes building a product that the customer will learn to hate?

 

planned obsolesce

You are mistaken.  It's not planned obsolescence (top down thinking), rather it's cost/benefit - how much time and resources does one have to invest and what are the future expected cash flows.  Companies must operate at at least break even or they're quickly out of business, this means enough profit to cover costs.  Even cost-no-object components have to be profitable remain in business. 

Companies commonly choose the price point within a market in which to compete, then a cost ceiling to target a specific profit margin.  Under this cost ceiling, compromises must be made in choosing materials, the construction methods, R&D both initial and ongoing during the life cycle of the product, etc to target creating/manufacturing the best product they can make to compete within a specific market cost segment.    Motivation is increased profitability and/or increased satisfaction in expressing knowledge/creativity/ingenuity/engineering, all accomplished through increased sales.  

Increasing quality/longevity sounds like a good thing, but with it comes costs and maybe more importantly alternatives.

The benefit of MAY result in goodwill enough to create FUTURE repeat sales enough to offset the time, effort, and resources one spends now VS using the  time, effort, and resources investing in R&D, infrastructure, etc.  Most companies choose the later as the most creative and profitable path which is the same path as remaining competitive in the market.

If people will pay for the increased cost of longevity, manufacturers will create it. 

True, manufacturers choose what and when to release new technologies often to maximize income streams, but that's not the same as creating a product then purposely build in timed obsolescence in hope of repeat sales.

It's simply supply and demand, and the seeking for higher profits and/or increased recognition for their creativity.  Cost/benefit.