Part-Time Audiophile Best of the Year Awards

I don’t even understand what is trying to be communicated here, although I suspect that if I did I wouldn’t agree

 

This kind of stuff pisses me off. Think about how many people can afford that and of those people, how many bought them to appreciate the sound as opposed to those who bought them because they could (and probably have gold toilets and decorating imspiration from Ceasar’s Palace).

I guess I feel like $100k speakers are LAZY. They invent and engineer these wonderful products and price them out of the stratosphere to avoid mass production.

 

Jealousy isn't a pretty thing. Who cares what some people do with their money? It doesn't affect me in the least and prefer to instead concentrate on my own situation.

 

I seem to recall the Black Pearl cables being out back in the 90's and went for tens of thousands of dollars. There may be more of that going on today, but surely that's just a sign of the times. And besides, who on this forum doesn't LOVE some amazing audio gear porn? Quit with the sanctimonious "it's out of control." It was never under your control to begin with. Buy what you can afford, appreciate it, and who cares what others spend their money on. And were it not for some of the amazing, high-dollar tech out there now, it'd never trickle down into what we can afford, just like auto manufacturers who participate in motorsports and so forth. Halo gear is awesome and I, for one, love it, even if I'll never be able to afford it.

But, maybe someday those Wilsons will pop up on USAudioMart for $10k from a "divorce settlement," hehehe.

 

First a few disclaimers...

I love reading about stuff, any stuff, that's both in and way out of my price range.

I used to drive a Toyota minivan in the winter and a Porsche in the summer. The ying and yang was way too much for me so I got rid of both of them and now drive an Audi year-round.

I respect that others can, and do enjoy ultra-expensive audio gear, and automobiles. I don't begrudge anyone any of that.

But the car versus audio comparison above simply does not hold up to scrutiny.

Audio reviewers can load on all sorts of made-up mumbo-jumbo, none of it necessarily bearing any resemblance to reality, most of it being pretty much not reproducible by the next guy. "I hear angels dancing on pin heads." "I hear the soupcon of hippo flatulence in a pond." It's gotten to the point where none of the verbiage used to describe the objects of this hobby / passion is truly understood - nor transferable to the next guy. A reviewer can claim to hear anything, to not hear anything, and nobody can dare call him out on it - since obviously others lack the sophisticated knowledge and experience to do so.

But that's not the case with autos - even high performance / cost ones. Yes a car's performance / handling etc. does to a good amount depend on the driver's ability, but by and large those results are very reproducible. Acceleration. Top speed. Skid pad. Understeer or oversteer. Lap times. Leg room. Heating and cooling system. Stowage space. Number of cupholders. Stopping distance. Fit and finish. Weight. Capacities. Etc. Read a few reviews by professional drivers about the same car and you've got a pretty solid understanding, in terms that you actually can understand, of what that car will actually, really, for truly, feel like if you were to get into it yourself. Even a Toyota minivan driver who has never driven a Porsche, will have a really good handle on how different driving a Porsche would be. He can imagine what better cornering would be like. Better braking. Gobs more power in a lighter vehicle. Not everything - but a very real and useful amount.

But a "monoprice guy" - to use the term quoted? After reading "reviews" of ultra high end gear? There's a good chance that little of what he will read will be at all grounded in a reality that he can understand. But again as is said / implied above. That's his deficiency; his lack of experience. It can never be a problem with the review or the reviewer.

And that's the problem in the end. I think we all would enjoy reading about things we can't afford: cars, audio gear, homes, trophy wives. Provided that what we read is grounded in a reality, and presented in a way, that we can relate to and understand.

Jeff

 

Well, there's only so many ways one can explain, in words, what we experience from different types and levels of audio gear. I've been through so much equipment in my little room it's almost disturbing. What's less disturbing is that at a certain point, everything starts to take on a different sound. Maybe not fuses, some cables, etc... But amp to amp, cartridge to cartridge, phono stage, etc... But describing those changes is a daunting task. Especially when you've essentially said the exact same thing about the gear it replaced, probably months ago. We have "dynos" for stereo systems just like the car guys do. And just like in cars, one car's 300 hp may be entirely different than another due to weight, gearing, powerband, throttle response - the sorts of things that novice car drivers wouldn't even notice or if they did, wouldn't be able to explain it well.

This is also the point where the aforementioned dynos/tests for stereo system are but a very, very small part of my criteria in evaluating a new gear purchase or the sound I'm hearing in my room.

I believe the car to audio comparison is very valid, maybe because at various points both have been very important hobbies to me. People would scoff that I'd spend $4k on upgrades for a Lancer EVO when a Toyota Corrolla essentially performs the same function.

We're wired different from them. I want to celebrate that. I also don't want to get hung up in analogies, but there are a great many parallels between the two as a hobbyist, in my opinion.

 

I certainly don't care as long as they use Class D amps (and don't waste energy)


but the uber spendy cables bring up consumer protection issues

 

I don't follow.

 

it's called fraud

 

I go skiing at Aspen and Vail. I dress up in the finest accessories and sit at the bottom of the ski-lift and just talk smack about everybody's lack luster attire.

Then I go drink ****e wine in the lodge and ignore and snub the average people who come up and order a couple of coors lights.
Then I drive my pinto back to Denver.
But that's just me.

 

Schiits and giggles; after reading this and the TAS similar roundup, 3 of my system components get mentioned. And I never read the regular issues or have much use for reviews. Just goes to show most of us can audition, pick their own gear and make good choices.

 

I mean I don't

 

Plenty of coal to go around. I'm sure the vast majority of actual audiophiles on the Music Forum "waste" little energy and enjoy their Class A power just fine.

 

Isn't that just a little strong?

 

Wrong thread

 

Little strong = absurd

 

Jeff, I respectfully disagree on a few points.

1. We can measure some of the audio experience. We have FR plots, MLSSA graphs, various jitter and noise floor metrics, etc. But these metrics measure part of the performance whereas arguably car performance can be contained entirely in 6 numbers or so. But like car metrics, the feel of the car is subjective-how do you measure road feel or the more sensual experience of driving a high performance care? So I would argue that car metrics and audio metrics share much in common.

2. Every item in our Best of 2017 list is grounded in reality. There is real science behind the components and accessories on that list. You may not agree with the pricing at the upper end but the performance is real. I would not spend $95K on a component but the CH Precision gear can sound amazing. I have heard some incredible demos. Why would we limit a millionaire's freedom to buy crazy expensive gear? We shouldn't as it's their money.

3. Reviewers do get exposed to a lot of gear at shows from show coverage and also from a constant parade of gear through their home and portable systems. I have learned more in the four years I have been writing than the entire 30 before that I spent in audio. But no one should rely, imho, on a reviewer's rave to buy a product. They should use our guidance to get to a short list and then go audition that gear if possible or at least buy from companies that offer 30/60 day return policies.

 

Where is fraud occurring?

 

In small narrow minds.

 

Oh for crying out loud. Nothing like putting "$300,000" and "wire" in the same sentence in order to get the natives riled up. Let's add some context, shall we? Here's what PTA says in the article:

"At every major audio show, it seems at least a few exhibitors demo Nordost’s “supreme reference,” Odin 2. Between interconnects, speaker cable and power cords, the tab for that wire alone can top $300,000. That obviously will appeal only to the one percenters in the hobby, but Nordost also conducts convincing demos showing that even its lower-cost cables can have significant sonic benefits, particularly increased speed, clarity and dynamics, with a lower noise floor. "

Anybody who can read can see that PTA is not recommending 6-figure cables. They are advocating for the Nordost brand, including their entry level cables. Not to mention the following entry is for Anti-Cables. I have zero interest in six-figure anything in audio, but there's something for everybody in each category here.

 

You can't let the facts get in the way of a good accusation.

 

it would be nice if there WERE any facts offered by cable-makers... but it is very rare

Kimber does list the inductance per foot of their speaker cables

 

Sure they are. So as not to be dismissed by the masses, a smart reviewer will hedge that recommendation (either implicit or implied) and offer up something for us mortals to come across as a reasonable person. PTA has been careful to do that too.

Anybody who can read, and has done so for a while, will no doubt reflect that Scot Hull and company have been offering an interesting and fresh perspective on audio hardware. The PTA site has certainly grown since their humble beginnings, as evidenced by their numerous colorful advertising banners who have flocked in large numbers to his site. Not knocking that, this is the damned USA after all. (BTW, nice job Rafe on the Peter Qvortrup spread. That was a nice piece of audio journalism.)

I like PTA. There is a personality behind the words, much like Tyll has done for headphones. You may agree or disagree with them, but at least you have a standard measuring stick from which to go by. Still, there is a certain exasperation that comes with sniffing the vicarious experience of listening to the best there is, only to realize that you can't have it. I stay out of Porsche dealerships, but I know where they are in case my ship comes in. So, I don't visit PTA much more than once in a few months. I suspect that is true for many of us.

I'm really tired of all of the audio show coverage, however. Not just his site, but the whole dang lot of 'em. The best in show crap is just one-upsmanship site-hit competition ridiculousness. Truly nauseating. I'd rather see more real world pieces like Steve Guttenberg (gasp) did on the Brooklyn Brownstone guy. You had insight as to how a legitimate person with audio cred set up his living space in a thoughtful way. I can relate to that. Still aspirational for some of the equipment, but definitely influencing with no exasperation.

So, I wish each audiophile site had a section carved out for a reviewer akin to what Alex Dykes does for cars (he's the best reviewer in the business), Dirck Edge does for motorcycles, and Paul Candy did for 6 Moons. Smart, practical, thorough, and accessible. The bling is pretty, but it is blinding.

 

Saying there is a lot more money around in automotive journalism than high end audio (to say nothing of high end audio journalism) is a tremendous understatement.

 

Virtually any cable manufacturer has this information, as well as capacitance, etc. about each of their cables, and will generally share it if asked. Now, relating that to audio characteristics in a given system is a different story (and probably not possible at this time)