A look at High End Hi-Fi

[Wayde]

I had an interesting chat yesterday with my local high end audio dealer. He has a store in town called Soundstage that specializes in really esoteric high end stuff. His store carries names like Conrad Johnson, Martin Logan, Arcam and a whack of others I've never heard of. Among the listening rooms are severely exotic kits with tube amps and alien looking speakers. Total cost for some of these systems rival a modest home.

I've always had mixed feelings about this price point. I can put my finger on a dollar value of diminishing returns way way below this price point to be sure. But at the same time I highly respect the stuff, it's just cool. But, I hold proudly to my entry level cut-above-the-stuff-from-the-big-box-stores level.

We spoke about the kinds of customers he gets that buys high end. I know he must see all kinds and can accurately profile most people who walk in.

According to him the kind of people who spend $10,000 on a single component are mostly doctors. We live in a high tech area. The small city where I live is stinking rich with software, Blackberry, search, database and Internet money. Not surprisingly it seems that technology and engineering types aren't as taken by the seriously high end audio. He's had one of the RIM's CEOs in his store (there are two of them and I didn't ask which one). Apparently he has some high priced audio gear in his home but strings it all together with low end wires and cables. Apparently he refuses to believe there are any gains to be made from higher end cables. It's a contention with which I would agree in an empirical sense.

However - if I had a $5K DVD player hooked up to my $10K surround processor / pre-amp… something just doesn't feel right sticking Radio Shack cables between them. I know that blind A/B/X testing demonstrates people just can't tell the difference. Maybe that makes me a sucker, but I think I'd buy at least slightly more expensive interconnects and speaker wire anyway, even if it were simply an esthetic.

Psychoacoustics

I know I've heard the term before in talks of objective vs subjective hi-fi. Perhaps some would say it's just another name for psychological, similar to psychosomatic illness suffered by children who don't want to go to school on Monday morning. But in our conversation he made valid points about what makes us like one sound over another. What makes us prefer a given sound quality may have nothing to do with the audible frequency ranges or other quantifiable criteria. I suppose it's the classic subjectivist argument of perception being reality, something I reject philosophically. But I remain open minded enough to take a listen.

And that's what it comes down, something the local hi-fi guy (a subjectivist) and I (a self-styled hi-fi objectivist) unquestionably agree upon. It's all about listening and only your ears should decide what you really like.

Link To Original Article

http://www.csicop.org/si/9505/belief.html

Interesting article, covers the psychological side fairly well.

[Wayde]

That's an excellent article. I find this topic fascinating. The document reminds me a lot of reading from the Skeptics Dictionary.

It's interesting "The Yearning Unit" probably accounts for belief in superior cables, as well the faces on Mars.

[John Simpson]

Wayde, there's certainly a lot of psychology involved in buying expensive equipment, especially whn the returns you get from the performance decay exponentially. It's much like buying a Mercedes over a common family car: they both do exactly the same job, and the difference you get in the quality of equipment is rarely worth the cost of the additional equipment itself.

In economics we call it "opportunity cost" -- the intangible feeling you get from owning something that you value highly. I bought a Denon DVD-5000 for $5000 that won't play scratched DVDs (whereas our chipped XBox will!) -- but *knowing* that I have one of the world's most desirable DVD players (well, it used to be at least) gives me an inflated feeling of value.

There is a drawback to buying high-end equipment, though. Even though the improvements may be minimal, you eventually learn to recognise them. Going backwards in price-bracket as technology advances is usually impossible!

(I'll have to make sure my wife reads this )

[Wayde]

Thanks johnson4.

I agree with you. The more expensive piece the DVD-5000 probably looks a lot nicer than a cheapie DVD player. Also the Denon will definitely last you longer. To some that might not be such an advantage if you've bought a bargain basement DVD player you obviously don't expect it to last you decades and you probably plan on replacing it sooner.

Changing technology means this is a fair consideration. I spent too much money on a Dolby Pro-Logic surround processor back in the early 90s, it was made by Adcom. It was a nice unit and gave me years of service. Today it sits in my basement looking for a new owner if someone wanted it. On the other hand I have a two channel NAD amp that is of the same vintage as my Adcom and I am still using it. The simple job of a power amp will never go out of style. I'm glad I spent a little extra on the amp and got one I'm still glad to use today.